Now for Something ENTIRELY Different..

1. 83

   gmwilliamsposted 2 years ago

   
   Do you contend that people have become more shallow today than in previous decades?  Do you maintain that people place importance on superficial, even transient matters?  Your thoughts?

   replyreport
   1. 77

      Castlepalomaposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      I heard the term robot zombies in the 80s, that is happening more now than ever.

      replyreport
   2. 75

      lovetherainposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      No, people are always shallow and always will be.

      replyreport
   3. 82

      Brenda Arledgeposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      I think most people have a tendency to be shallow.
      We overlook what is truly important sometimes until it's too late.

      replyreport
      1. 77

         Castlepalomaposted 2 years agoin reply to this

         +

         replyreport
   4. 85

      Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      I love your threads --- they are direct and give me a great opportunity to directly vent my opinion.
      
      First a direct yes to the question -- IMO people have become more shallow.
      
      Ok, I think I understand your question --   In my view, I don't think people are not very deep.  Not deep thinkers, and actually many so shallow they can make accommodations for just about anything... LOL
      
      For instance, some can watch a video of a man running from a crowd, as fast as his 17-year-old legs will carry him -- being knocked down hit with a skateboard a couple of times, a gun stuck in his face kicked in the head all while being chased by a crowd screaming get him! And they found it inexcusable that this kid shot this guy due to being scared to death, and injured.  So what ya think?  Do we have a ton of very dead-headed shallow people in our society ---  I say we do.
      
      People who don't have much emotional or intellectual depth,  shallow people who judge others as their peers do... It's called groupthink.

      replyreport
      1. 81

         Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

         Its worse than shallow.
         Its deliberate bullying.
         Its suppressing of what is true and decent.
         
         Resist, I say.
         Be true to your deeper you
         and try not to take it seriously.
         It's God's world. 
         God's got this.
         What else can we do?

         replyreport
         1. 75

            lovetherainposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            What is "true" is that everyone, and I mean everyone, even those who think they are :nice" and "good" are not. No one is. We all do have the potential to choose good behaviors,and there are good things about humans such as love for others, empathy etc. But we all also have base desires that we have to learn to control. And THAT is the spiritual path.

            replyreport
         2. 85

            Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

            Oh yes ...

            replyreport
         3. 90

            MizBejabbersposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            Deliberate bullying by unarmed men of a 17 year old pointing a gun into their midst. That takes the cake! Can you honestly say that he had the right to take a semi automatic weapon to a protest? Cite me that law, please.

            replyreport
            1. 85

               Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

               "Legal experts had considered the misdemeanor gun charge — which carries up to nine months in jail — to be the easiest charge for the state to prove.
               
               Ahead of Monday’s closing arguments, Judge Bruce Schroeder ruled Wisconsin’s open carry law is so confusingly written it can be interpreted to mean 17-year-olds can openly carry firearms as long as they’re not short-barrel rifles. " Which Rittenhouse was not it was a long gun.
               In my view, this kind of law should be changed. I don't think anyone needs to carry a long gun in public.
               
               https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct- … story.html

               replyreport
      2. 90

         MizBejabbersposted 2 years agoin reply to this

         I don't think that is a good example of shallow. You started in the middle of the story. This 17-year-old white kid from Illinois took his semi automatic weapon and went out as a vigilante to "help the police" at a protest in Kenosha, Wisconsin. The protest was over the shooting of a black man by the Kenosha police.
         
         https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53934109
         
         It doesn't take a  rocket scientist to realize that this kid was in the wrong. He bit off more than he could chew, and the fact that somebody went after him with a skateboard doesn't warrant our tears and sympathy.  Delving into Kyle Rittenhouse's background, he was pro-police, and a Trump supporter. He said he was defending the police. Do you see a pattern developing here?
         
         Not his monkeys, not his circus. Now two people are needlessly dead. He should have stayed home and let the police handle it. Perhaps he had the right to stage his own protest (free speech, you know), but not with a gun. Let's see what were we discussing here? Oh yes, shallow thinking. I'd say he wins the prize of the day.

         replyreport
         1. 85

            Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

            "I don't think that is a good example of shallow. You started in the middle of the story. This 17-year-old white kid from Illinois took his semi automatic weapon and went out as a vigilante to "help the police" at a protest in Kenosha, Wisconsin. The protest was over the shooting of a black man by the Kenosha police."  Great point logically.
            
            My opinion was more in regards to the fact Kyle did go, he did end up killing two people which from what I saw appeared to be self-defense.
            
            In my view, the keyword in your comment is that he is 17 years old. One could say this was a very poor judgment call of a mature teenager.   Did he bit off more than he could chew? Oh yeah... 
            
            So when he ran they chased.  The anger was fused and lit.  He was kicked in the head ended up on the ground, then hit twice with a skateboard, then attacked by a man trying to pull the gun from his hands, all the time on the ground... From what I saw in the videos he shoot in self-defense.
            
            Are we being shallow by judging the situation, taking sides?  Just reading in our own opinions. The point is he did go, he did end up shooting and killing two people.   It seems we need to just consider --- did he shoot in self-defense?   Did he seem to want to shoot that gun? He had 30 rounds, did he just use the bullets fired out of self-defense?  This is ultimately up to a jury that was given all the information that was available, along with witnesses that were on that street that very night. Up to them to offer a verdict. He certainly should not have gone, such poor judgment. But is he a murderer?
            
            I will trust the jury more than your or my opinion, and I will respect their verdict without question, Will you?

            replyreport
            1. 72

               Miebakagh57posted 2 years agoin reply to this

               I would not in any sense if they behave shallow. The point is that justice must be done.

               replyreport
   5. 80

      Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      I Don't know, under the pressure of survival no one has time to stop and smell the roses. If superficial is obsession over survival, then yes, we have become shallow and such out of necessity.

      replyreport
      1. 81

         Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

         What causes the "pressure of survival" in our modern society?

         replyreport
         1. 80

            Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

            Think about it for a minute.
            
            It is scary to realize that your livelihood, the mortgage, getting the kids through college etc., all hinges on you keeping a job in an uncertain economy. Your boss may "let you go" on his or her caprice. You reinvent yourself every day to stay viable. You are only as good as your ability to stay ahead of the competition and the curve. There is a pressure associated with staying on a treadmill that goes ever faster, a bar that is raised ever higher.
            
            I am surprised that there are not more heart attacks and nervous breakdown than there are.

            replyreport
            1. 94

               wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

               True, but...is it any different that it was 200 years ago?  When the weather determined whether you would have enough food for the winter.  When if you got sick you took a couple of herbs and hoped for survival?  When a broken leg was often terminal? 
               
               There has never been a time in human history when the "man in the street" was not under pressure to survive.  The specific pressure has changed but not that there is pressure. 
               
               Unless you take into account that our welfare system will provide housing, medical, food and anything else you need - that has to relieve a lot of it as survival is no longer at stake every day.  Just the standard of living you have.

               replyreport
               1. 80

                  Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

                  Perhaps, but 200 years ago , you had a little more control of your destiny based on your efforts and yours alone. I would say that the pressure is different and in my point of view more intense as it is so much easier to lose it all due to so many forces beyond your control, having nothing to do "with Acts of God" weather, droughts, etc.
                  
                  I believe that we all have a need for housing, sustenance, medical care. No one can afford to live as if all that will be provided even at the minimal levels.
                  
                  The so called security blanket has more than enough holes where there still are homeless and those that are malnourished here in the "land of plenty"

                  replyreport
                  1. 94

                     wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                     And yet thousands upon thousands of people do just that, and for the most part do it by choice.  When we see multiple generations doing it, it isn't because that's the only way to live.
                     
                     Yes, there are still homeless...the vast majority of which have either a mental or drug problem.  That they survive more than a few weeks or months is a testament to our welfare/charity system - certainly they would not make it that long 200 years ago.
                     
                     The malnourished - I believe that the vast majority of those are either those same mental or drug problem people, OR the children of people that should never, ever have had kids.

                     replyreport
                     1. 83

                        gmwilliamsposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                        Our social system ENCOURAGES dependency.  People need to learn how to be self-sufficient.

                        replyreport
                        1. 77

                           Castlepalomaposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                           *

                           replyreport
                           1. 81

                              Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                              Niceness.

                              replyreport
                              1. 77

                                 Castlepalomaposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                                 That too.

                                 replyreport
                           2. 72

                              Miebakagh57posted 2 years agoin reply to this

                              Were not these dependencies created on political motives? It's good people are encouraged and helped. But not financially stressed.                                        Edit: ladies and gentlemen, seems they's a glitch at the moment...? I'm not responding to what Castlepaloma said, but GM Williams.

                              replyreport
            2. 81

               Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

               Our world has become very complicated. No wonder the young adults we run into every day, whether checking, waitressing, managing or supervising in their various roles dealing with customers, clients and patrons.  It's no wonder they seem so automatic: No time to talk, to chat, to be pleasant. "Look at this world we're in," they seem to silently say. "Get over yourself, you, from the past ... where life gave you room to breathe, to smile, to laugh, joke, philosophize and observe.
               Yeah. Thanks for not much."
               
               
               Who can we thank?
               Bill Gates and Steve Jobs?
               I do.

               replyreport
               1. 80

                  Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

                  No, workers don't get to engage in idle banter with customers, as time is money. Service is measured out in measuring cup. The cameras are watching. Modernity is inevitable. This is capitalism, more widgets by fewer people in ess time at lower cost. In the components of the system where do you think that the squeeze will be? Bill Gates and the late Steve Jobs are just extensions of Andrew Carnegie, John D. Rockefeller, Henry Ford and the list goes on, nothing new under the sun.

                  replyreport
               2. 77

                  Castlepalomaposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                  No no no!!! don't ever thank Kill Gates.

                  replyreport
         2. 90

            MizBejabbersposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            I believe that it is over population. Too many people, and we are running out of raw materials to produce the goods needed to keep everyone comfortable. I base my statement on the fact that our parents after WWII had more financial abundance and more comfortable lifestyles than our children do today. People of my age were caught in between. By the time we worked up to afford our comforts, inflation had set in and the middle class wasn't as "middle class" as our parents were. If we were, we were deeply in debt to pay for it.

            replyreport
            1. 77

               Castlepalomaposted 2 years agoin reply to this

               When growing up, I don't remember any body in any deep debt and most owned their own home. Don't remember job with much struggling or homeless tent cities in every major city. We may have not been rich, yet everyone had their basic needs as the international law requires.

               replyreport
   6. 72

      Miebakagh57posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Serious people can be shallow at times. That's when they want to relax.                                               But the majority are...and I can't rely on them.

      replyreport
2. 89

   Jodahposted 2 years ago

   I am not sure if people are any more shallow now, but they do want everything delivered “now” and fast, they don’t have the patience any longer to wait for anything. Maybe that attitude comes across as shallow.

   replyreport