They shouldn’t say and do exactly what their superiors want to hear and see. (People in several groups and organizations I am familiar with who systematically and deliberately say and do exactly what their superior wants to hear and see.)
They shouldn’t use babysitting mentality.*
I have a familiar dislike for whatever tastes of moralizing. And it is easy to understand why. Moralizing comes from a “should”. And instead of a more inclusive “we” which tends to diffuse the shoulds, it comes from an attitude of aiming it towards others and more or less excluding oneself.
We instinctively feel something is off there, whatever position we take towards the moralizing itself, and whether we recognize it in others or ourselves.
They shouldn’t moralize.
They shouldn’t let ideology go before people. (Those in the US who have a rigid anti-government ideology, not caring about its consequences.)
Most of us have one or several deep seated hangups. They are all stressful when triggered, and they all come from identification with a viewpoint.
One of mine is getting easily annoyed when people are noisy with their newspapers on the train.
It is easy to ignore these types of hangups because they may seem embarrassing and unimportant.
It’s too late. (To make my life as I would like it.)
I need it to be witnessed. (My experience and what is going on for me.)
They should be more realistic. (Sports commentators and “experts” expecting the Norwegian athletes to perform optimally at each event and win. If the athletes do well, they just get what they expected. And if they don’t – which is equally or more likely – they get disappointed. It also puts extra pressure on the athletes which they don’t need. It seems a poor strategy all around. Much better to take a level-headed approach, show some sportsmanship, and get pleasantly surprised.)
I need to make a good impression.
He should approach with curiosity, not cynicism. (Harald Eia who has made a TV series about nature & nurture which I find skewed, one-sided, cynical, polarizing, and more destructive than constructive.)
I should have a legacy. (I saw the title of the last America’s Evolutionary Evangelists podcast – Evolutionary Legacy – and that thought came up.)
They are making themselves more stupid than they are. (And that is not OK.)
He shouldn’t overgeneralize. (Harald Eia who made a documentary on how the social sciences ignore biology, just because that was his experience when he was a student.)
It is better to question assumptions. (It is better to question underlying assumptions – ones own and those of others – than to not do it).
All here is tremendously silly. (All here in this journal.)
They should give a medal, not prosecute. (Regarding the Greenpeace activists who crashed a climate-conference party, and others – such as hobby-hackers – who do no harm but expose weaknesses in the system.)
There is a pitifully small band of wolves in Norway, and still some folks are afraid and want them killed.
It seems so thoroughly idiotic. No human has been killed by wolves in recorded history. The few sheep that are killed are generously compensated for by the government.
And we chose and accept far greater risks all the time, for instance every time we use a car, or use toxic chemicals in our homes or in the yard, or allow bees and wasps in nature (a significant number dies each year from stings). Most obviously, we chose and accept far greater risks through how we organize ourselves as a society, in ways that are not aligned with ecological realities (ecological footprints way over what the Earth can support, economical models and policies that ignore embeddedness in ecosystems, huge gaps between rich and poor, and so on).
Their priorities are wrong. (When governments around the world are using immense resources on vaccines for the piggy flu, which is many times less harmful than the regular seasonal flus – perhaps 50 times less harmful according to current numbers. Those resources could have been spent on different areas, and with far higher impact.)
They create a tempest in a teapot. (Those who make the piggy flu into something more than it is. WHO made a big thing out of the piggy flu and call it a pandemic, even if it has a lower mortality rate than the regular seasonal flu. Governments do the same and buy huge amounts of piggy flu vaccine, even if it is less harmful than the regular yearly flu. The media blows it all up even further, making it appear as something dangerous while the numbers show something entirely different. People buy into it.)
They should question their own opinions.
Those who support policies not in their own interest: The poor in the US who favor policies (republican) that give more to the rich and less to themselves. Those in Norway who support FrP, a libertarian party hoping to destroy that which those very same people benefit from (social safety net, public ownership of certain industries etc.). The ones, mainly in the US, who oppose vaccinations even if they benefit hugely from living in a society where major diseases are eliminated or reduced because of vaccinations.
Trying to change it (the situation) is better than leaving.
It is better to produce than to enjoy. (Producing literature, music, performances, inventions and more.)
| donation | donation | donation | donation | donation | donation | donation |
