- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
I think an important question here is what need refers to. Needed to become what?
That’s not a leading question - I mean that I don’t know what the target behaviour should be in any concrete terms. If we don’t know where we’re going it’s hard to navigate.
What do we think we should hold up as virtues? I’m sure we all have a few ideas but something coherent and consistent would be good.
Lots of things that are currently accepted as good are really problematic, I feel. Classic example - hard work. The idea that toil is inherently noble and converselt wanting to relax is slothful. Doesn’t really lead down a good road.
Was going to comment something like imagine being GenZ and growing up with Mike Adriano and Trevor from GTA as your role models.
Actually as a millenial I remember spending my time getting Tommy Vercetti to use prostitutes in Vice City while the free porn sites were far less moderated and contained extremely questionable content.
Maybe these external influences are less of an issue if people realise they are “entertainment” and not reality. I could picture a kid who struggles to separate the two but they’d be a minority.
IMO parents/caregivers need to step up to ensure kids are raised properly but I think that’s the main point Southgate is making.
As a fellow millennial and Vice City alumni I agree with you and Gareth Southgate.
But I also think that the quantity of time that kids are spending online and in front of screens is playing a bigger part than we recognise. We didn’t have smartphone on us 24/7. And of course content producers have gotten better at making their stuff visually stimulating and addictive.
Funnily enough though, a few weeks ago I had some late night sessions playing GTA for the first time in about 15 years and noticed afterwards that I was driving faster and accelerating much hard in the car IRL!
The dark patterns of modern design is the biggie for me. Addictiveness is being optimised for. Back in the day it was just a happy accident (for developers).
I don’t fret about the contents of what they’re exposed to (oh no, nudity and violence, how outlandish, how will humans cope…) but the format it’s presented being designed to screw with their brains ain’t good.
We didn’t have smartphone on us 24/7. And of course content producers have gotten better at making their stuff visually stimulating and addictive.
Yeah I think both of those could be reasons why young people have problems today. Another reason could be the Covid lockdowns, which resulted in young people spending more time online, and less time in the real world.
When I was young I spent some time online, using internet forums etc. But the most fun I had was when I socialised with real people in the real world.
Yeah, it was the same for me. And I think you’re right about the lockdowns too. Apparently those kids even have lower IQs as a result…
young people have problems today
Out of curiosity, what problems are you referring to?
That’s probably mostly due to post-covid illness. Its not only long covid, it can trigger many other illnesses unfortunately.
This doesn’t provide any insight into the problems young people are facing, only the consequences.
I think health problems are one type of problem that young people are facing, and the news has talked about mental health in particular being a growing problem for young people.
Lack of employment generally (not just health related) seems to be a problem - apparently the percentage of young people who aren’t in employment, education, or training is increasing.
I think Sir Gareth has identified some of the problems too. Lack of healthy role models, abundance of unhealthy role models. Abundance of porn, especially unhealthy porn. Negative effects of social media. Etc.
wait… why is this just boys, and also cant we have all of that?
True, you could argue that young women are also being negatively affected by “toxic influencers”.
I guess Gareth has chosen to focus on issues facing young men though. Of course Gareth has experience mentoring young men, as the manager of England’s men’s football team.
Society probably should help both young women and young men, but maybe each group faces slightly different problems. E.g. according to the Samaritans, men are 3 times as likely to die from suicide as women, although women attempt suicide more than men do. So both groups clearly have problems, but they seem to deal with those problems in different ways. Maybe different approaches are needed when helping each gender.
Removed by mod
This guy probably thinks Amicus isn’t a good role model, despite being a character from a PORN VIDEO GAME.
Amouranth is my role model
I agree with him, but I think there are multiple different ways to approach this issue (in many western countries).
Part of this is starting boys one year later in school, because developmentally, boys hit puberty later than girls. Another part needs to be offline activities like camping, biking, and sailing that get boys outside and playing with each other in healthy environments. Scouting was a great example when I was a kid. It let kids blow off excess steam, while teaching them how to work together, how to safely help injured people, deal with emergencies, and experience the wonder of the outdoors. It also taught good skills like swimming, personal finance, and leadership.
I think back then, the Internet was a lot more rudimentary, and cellphones really could only be used for calling. Videogames were collaborative, in-person activities, and while it did peel people away, it wasn’t the isolated, single-player experience it is now. Kids and adults have to get away from that sometimes.
True. Jesus is a good role model.
Shame he’s been co-opted by cultists.
Doesn’t mean you can’t follow Him
You can use the swastika as a symbol for luck if you’d like, Western society is not going to see it that way. Christianity has a hell of a lot to answer for and I couldn’t in good conscience recommend anyone, adult or child, treat its fan-fiction patchwork quilt of a source book as a basis for modern living. Even the language of it makes my skin crawl - “follow”? Ew. No, build your own moral code, don’t just take one off the shelf.
build your own moral code
By that logic, we should get rid of global human rights and international courts. Also stop criticising people who have a different moral code. Maybe we should stop enforcing the law in general.
That’s a particularly cynical view of human nature you’ve got there.
I was arguing that one should be a good person because one has decided to, not because one has been told to, particularly given the Christian reward/punishment afterlife framing device. I try to be a good person and I do so expecting nothing in return. I’m not trying to accrue karma points or offset “bad” deeds so as to avoid punishment, but I am trying to act in a way that I feel will contribute to a more positive society.
So in the case of building one’s own moral code I am talking about each individual’s journey in discovering who they are and what they feel is the right thing to do. A subset of people are going to be evil bastards regardless of any ethics we teach them - religion certainly doesn’t seem to make a lick of difference on that front. But putting that minority of rubbish humanity aside, I’d rather the rest decide that we should try to look after each other because they feel that it’s a good way to live, not in a cynical attempt to curry favour with some nebulous abstract entity.
Crucially, I think we actually all do build our own moral codes, regardless of whether we have a religion taught to us or not, and regardless of whether we think of it that way. At least if we acknowledge that it’s what we do then we could each take a more active part in ownership of our own behaviours, rather than tying ourselves in knots of cognitive dissonance. It’d hopefully mean we could make some progress rather than making the same mistakes repeatedly (let’s make new mistakes!).
For who, subs? Even Christians don’t follow a single word that guy said.
Someone who’s alive and real would be a good start.
Jesus is real, and that’s a historical fact. Jesus is still alive, His resurrection and ascension was witnessed.
But that’s besides the point; who else who is “alive and real” would you suggest is a better rolemodel? Even if Jesus was fictional, He’s still a pretty good role model by what’s written about Him.
He had some bangers but also some real shit takes like slaves obey your masters, faith healing, and substitutionary atonement. He’s been dead for ages and the multiple times he told his disciples the second coming would be within their lifetime never happened.
If you want better role models look at Fred Rogers, Dolly Parton, Bob Ross, people that are or were generous and charitable without damning anyone who doesn’t agree with their religion or believe they are a divine messiah.
Slaves obey your masters wasn’t Jesus. Also, what’s wrong with substitutionary atonement?
If I steal 20 bucks from you then I need to ask for your forgiveness, if my friend Tom forgives me or takes my punishment it does nothing to apologize to or provide reparations for victims. What is justice if not rewarding good behavior and punishing bad behavior?
Because if we were all to be punished for our sin, everyone will be thrown into hell eternally. That’s the punishment for sin.
That doesn’t justify the substitution, and if that god exists that’s not justice, that’s just an evil god who decided that eternal torture is an appropriate punishment for being born into inescapable sin with no chance of rehabilitation after a short life.
If the original sin was committed by Adam and Eve to eat the fruit of knowledge of good and bad, which they themselves would not know was bad because they hadn’t yet eaten it, then threatening to punish them and all of their descendents with eternal torture forever is evil. There’s also no reason that the atonement of sin to an all powerful god requires a blood sacrifice or any sacrifice except by his rules, there are multiple sin atonements in the Bible accepting flour, money, incense, prayer, etc.
Even if Jesus was fictional, He’s still a pretty good role model by what’s written about Him.
If Christianity only expected people to think that Jesus was a good role model then maybe I would be more willing to turn up at my local church. But Christianity expects a further belief: that Jesus is the son of God, which is a supernatural claim.
Personally I’m just not sure I believe the supernatural stuff.
The major foundation of Christianity is a belief in God, basically. Without believing in God, there’s no point to being a Christian. It is kinda hard to argue though that Jesus as protrayed in the Bible is not a good role model.
Jesus is still alive, His resurrection and ascension was witnessed.
Dude’s been hiding for a while then. Probably out of embarrassment.
The look on your face when He comes back will be hilarious
When’s he due? I might make time to pop along and see him.
Pretty sure Jesus (biblical Jesus) is dead
He rose again
Swell. Do you have a video? Or picture? Or any kind of evidence?
Do you have a video, picture or any kind of evidence that Julius Caesar was murdered?
Please can you answer my question instead of asking a different question.
Also, you’re the one making the claim that Jesus is alive. Do you have any evidence?
Jesus was nailed to a cross, tortured for days then imprisoned when he didn’t die from it right away. Who did that? Conservatives. Conservatives today believe Jesus’s messages of empathy, accepting others, and helping everyone are weakness that should be stamped out. Yet they all claim “country and God”. So if Jesus exists his message is clearly dead and just used to control masses and get them to fall in line. If you want to cherish the ideology of what Jesus was originally pushed as, that’s wonderful, but just as language evolves so does “Jesus.”. He’s now a curb stomp those you are unsure about, shoot that person that looks different than me, and if you ask me for help you should be deported to a slave labor camp.
Or maybe that’s just what the majority of Christian followers in the U.S believe.
Jesus did die right away. His lungs were collapsed, there was no way a human could survive that.
You’re right about conservatives being wrong about Jesus. I do not care what americans have warped the Gospel into, it doesn’t change what Jesus did for me. I can’t just say “Sorry Jesus, I know you were tortured and died for me, but the people you warned about claim to follow you and do awful things, so I’m going to turn down what you did to me.” That won’t make sense.
Sure, ideology does change and maybe “Christianity” cannot be synonymous with what Jesus taught anymore. Doesn’t change who Jesus is.
Yeah, I think you’re right about the Jesus and Christianity being split. I hope you do find all the joy in the world following the original Jesus’s ideology.
I do. That’s why I said Jesus is a good rolemodel. I’d never say the Church is a good rolemodel or that people should follow what other Christians are doing.
Historical fact where?
There is absolutely no evidence of his existence anywhere. No writing about his existence. Nothing.
That’s just flat out wrong.
Antiquities of the Jews - Flavius Josephus Babylonian Talmud (Sanhedrin 43a, 107b, Sotah 47a)
Annals – Tacitus
Lives of the Caesars – Suetonius
Letters (Book 10, Letter 96) – Pliny the Younger
Letter of Mara bar Serapion
The True Word – Celsus (Referenced in Origen’s Contra Celsum)
The Passing of Peregrinus – Lucian of Samosata
Gospel According to Matthew
Gospel According to Mark
Gospel and Acts of the Apostles According to Luke
Gospel According to John
Epistle to the Romans
First Epistle to the Corinthians
Second Epistle to the Corinthians
Epistle to the Galatians
Epistle to the Ephesians
Epistle to the Philippians
Epistle to the Colossians
First Epistle to the Thessalonians
Second Epistle to the Thessalonians
First Epistle to Timothy
Second Epistle to Timothy
Epistle to Titus
Epistle to Philemon
Epistle to the Hebrews
Epistle of James
First Epistle of Peter
Second Epistle of Peter
First Epistle of John
Second Epistle of John
Third Epistle of John
Epistle of Jude
I’m genuinely not trying to be a dick here, but citing the Bible as proof of the existence of Jesus is kind of like citing a comic as proof of the existence of Batman. No non-Christian is going to accept that evidence.
I’m not advocating for @Flax at all here, but I think it’s generally accepted that someone called Jesus (there were a LOT of people named Jesus back in the day) did exist and was something of a teacher.
Son of god though?.. no
Hate to break it to you, but that’s not historically honest.
“The Bible” is actually just a library of records gathered by various people which testify God. If there was another record/first-hand account about Jesus, it would be in the Bible. So not really. It’s more like trying to use records of Rome to prove that events happened in Rome, like the assassination of Julius Caesar. Or observations about other historical events to prove that event.
So essentially, these are all separate records, the Bible is just a compilation (except for Luke and Acts, they were originally one record, which I have amended my original comment to show)
The circular reasoning argument you are thinking about is about using the Bible to prove the Bible (eg, saying the Bible says it’s true, therefore it is). I’m not using the Bible to try and prove itself, I’m using the Bible to try and prove Jesus. You claimed there are no written records, yet that’s exactly what the Bible is. You can’t just dismiss it because a few hundred years later, Christians decided to canonise it as one text.
And even then, you can in a way, through textual criticism and supplementary historical evidence, prove things about a text (such as criterion of embarrassment, preservation, other details from the authors) relating to it’s legitimacy.
The texts of the New Testament have been one of the most spread and reproduced documents from the Roman empire period, nevermind the first century
Most historical events don’t have the documentation made about Jesus. They all popped up at the same time saying the same thing yet from different perspectives. Then there’s archaeological evidence carrying on about Christianity and a church existing, all from the first century. Something big must have happened, typically things like that don’t happen.
Lastly, not all of the texts I mentioned were biblical. The others were from other historians which didn’t have enough detail to be included in the Bible. The thing is, if they were more detailed, they would have most likely been included in the Bible, making your standard quite the tautology
It’s kind of like someone saying “use studies from academics showing the legitimacy and arguing in favour of the Bible- by the way, you cannot cite Christian Apologists” when by definition, a Christian apologist is someone who argues in favour of Christianity. If they were to argue in favour of Christianity, they’ll be a Christian apologist. It’ll be a tautology. Like how any detailed contemporary account of Jesus by someone close to Him would have most likely been included in the Bible.
Can’t downside because I might write hurty words. That’s literal violence.
