Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The past is not true

sive.rs

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 362 posts

Re: The past is not true

#221

Post by mrguyorama »

thanksbucko wrote: post #98
anbende wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oof, as a psychologist that deals a lot with people who were abused and mistreated, this is a pretty big generalization. Yes, as we age we come to see things from a more experienced perspective and the perspectives of the adults we grew up with and change, but going all the way to "that is why it is important to forgive your parents" is a big big step. It is typically a good idea to try to get to forgiveness, you're…

You may have a skewed view of the frequency of that level of abuse, due to the (very important) work you do. When it comes to humans there are exceptions to every rule, but not every single exception needs be called out. Not everything is “problematic” nor worth an “oof”.

We have statistics and they are not pretty. The CDC reports that 1 out of every 7 children have experienced child abuse or neglect in the last year. That doesn't even include stuff that technically isn't abuse or neglect but rather just damaging parenting: Plenty of kids had their parents impress upon them some personal neurosis out of their own traumatized problems, and now you start another cycle of that person causing issues in their kids unless they get help for that or find ways to avoid it.

I would consider one out of seven to be "problematic" and "oof" worthy

Re: The past is not true

#222

Post by hiatus »

norir wrote: post #213
mrguyorama wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Accept that sometimes when you do a bad thing that permanently harms someone else you don't deserve forgiveness (not everyone is christian FFS) and it's not wrong for that to follow you around forever. If that makes you uncomfortable, too fucking bad, don't irreversibly blind someone.

Judge not, lest ye be judged.

As if that were the case. If only those that did not judge were spared judgement themselves.

Re: The past is not true

#223

Post by mrguyorama »

benjaminwootton wrote: post #185
pharrington wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, the US in general is extremely cavalier with our car culture. Usually the only police involvement when an accident occurs is when they're called to the scene to take a report of the incident. Afterwards, the parties usually just deal with the aftermath themselves and through insurance companies. Even if you have to show up to court, people almost always walk away after pleading "not guilty," because again, the…

It's probably outsourced to the civil system knowing the US. It's a huge contrast between the US and European approach though.

It's really just another example of cops in the US choosing to not do their job. We have plenty of laws on the books that could punish inattentive or reckless driving especially when it results in a severe outcome, but that would require a cop to open an investigation and all that noise so they just write up a report for your insurance and try to get you to believe there's nothing else they can do.

The complete inefficacy and refusal to do any work of most american police departments is absurd. It's like they still believe their primary mission to be slave retrieval and violently suppressing strikes, as if it's still 1890.

Re: The past is not true

#224

Post by antisthenes »

gochi wrote: post #187
pdonis wrote: post #171

The article's main point is that you can change the story, but the actual example he gives is a change in the facts --the actual facts weren't what he thought they were. That is why the story changed--because he found out that the actual facts weren't as bad as the "facts" he had previously believed were true. So it's not true that "the actual facts are a small part of the story". They are the story; you can't change…

>actual facts You see how quickly you are to believe these are the "actual facts"? That's how quickly they were to believe their "actual facts" as well. That is the story. Not the facts. What we tell ourselves, what we tell others. This is why they brought up memories, an unstable collection of flashes in our mind, and we use these to craft a story. The story has changed, and will continue to change, you're in the pr…

> You see how quickly you are to believe these are the "actual facts"?

The actual facts is that a person who is walking is certainly not a person who "has irreversible spine damage and can't walk as a result".

The rest is absolutely irrelevant and philosophical bike-shedding.

Re: The past is not true

#225

Post by rTX5CMRXIfFG »

sanderjd wrote: post #165
UncleMeat wrote: post #120

If you are interested in this topic but would like to understand how historians think about things, look into writing about Historiography and Historical Memory. This person appears to just be some guy who describes himself as an entrepreneur and TED speaker. The way we understand the past is a deep topic that is analyzed and discussed by actual professionals constantly . Better to read their writing than this kind o…

This comment reminds me a lot of XKCD "Ten Thousand" ( https://xkcd.com/1053/ ). You don't need to denigrate the author's credibility to write about their personal experience and insight from it in order to provide a reference to the much deeper field of study on this to those who are interested. Personally, I had heard of "historiography" but had no idea this is what it meant. And now I do! And that wouldn't have ha…

The author’s claim “history is not true” is a huge one and it’s reasonable to look up his background to understand where he might be coming from.

Unfortunately for him (the author) he’s not coming from an expert’s position, and whatever perceptions that creates in people is not fault of the commenter you’re replying to.

Re: The past is not true

#226

Post by BSEdlMMldESB »

denton-scratch wrote: post #219
BSEdlMMldESB wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think you're wrong about historiography (and your highschool history teacher too). you're wrong about me being wrong. I remembered a little better now: "there is no history, the proper name of this subject is historiography" he taught us this but also, your reply suggests you missed the point (and my teacher's) that there is no history, it's all accounts by some "historian" I would use the name meta-history, or '…

Well, I said that history consists of accounts (stories). I agree that what I (and most historians) call "historiography" could be called "meta-history". But that activity already has a name; we don't need to construct a new term (with a Greek prefix and a Latin suffix) to stand-in for a word that already works fine. Historiography isn't some handwavey version of the past; it's the study of how historians do their wo…

yes, it's usually the end of the stick they give to people in countries other than 1st world

it is in a sense poetic that the stick is sourced in the 3rd world

but I get it, you're both, correctly nitpicking and I'm wrong. this is the hierarchy of the "worlds". I feel really bad now, highly recommended.

nonetheless, you refuse the deeper point. may somebody form the 0th world help you

Re: The past is not true

#227

Post by mrguyorama »

keepamovin wrote: post #30
avgcorrection wrote: post #22

Rubbish. You can’t extrapolate anything from this.

So sad that you missed the point. Open up to it man

What point? That this person is saying "I believed I did a bad thing and it turned out to be wrong so I exclaim that there is no objective reality and you shouldn't beat yourself up over bad things you think you did because maybe they weren't really that bad"?

Come on, this fails even basic logic. One event being misremembered is not valid proof that all or even many events are misremembered to your advantage.

Re: The past is not true

#229

Post by bittercynic »

mrguyorama wrote: post #198
amp108 wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know what's inside Mark Wahlberg's heart, but let's suppose it's someone whom, for the sake of argument, we know truly regrets their actions: what are they supposed to do if another person doesn't forgive them?

Accept that sometimes when you do a bad thing that permanently harms someone else you don't deserve forgiveness (not everyone is christian FFS) and it's not wrong for that to follow you around forever. If that makes you uncomfortable, too fucking bad, don't irreversibly blind someone.

If you make a mistake like this, where you owe a debt that can never be repaid, I think we need some social mechanism where you can do your best to make amends and get some measure of closure. This probably should follow you around forever, but maybe it shouldn't dominate every moment of the rest of your life.

Re: The past is not true

#230

Post by mrguyorama »

zzzeek wrote: post #93
hef19898 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then he should be more careful in public spaces and around other people, shouldn't he? Assuming it is true, that is, otherwise he should switch to fiction books.

careful about what, that he makes shit up? I think you'd be surprised how many people operate at that level by default.

Backing up your point by making up a bullshit story is called "lying" and "disinformation" and should be rejected outright by anyone who wants a high trust society. We should not build policy, intentions, or any ideologies based on a single lie from some dude trying to push a "nobody is ever guilty of anything" agenda.

This post adds nothing to the world, especially with the horrific conclusion it is encouraging you to accept. "The past is not real" is utter horseshit, and does not follow from "I did something I thought was really bad but was only kinda bad actually" in the first place.

Post reply on HN