[ / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / asmr / egy / fur / polk / pone ]

/kind/ - Random Acts of Kindness

No Bully! Help Others!

Catalog

Email
Comment *
File
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Oekaki
Show oekaki applet
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options
dicesidesmodifier
Password (For file and post deletion.)

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, swf, pdf
Max filesize is 12 MB.
Max image dimensions are 10000 x 10000.
You may upload 5 per post.


Please pay our friends a visit.

File: ecff5ae388340a1⋯.jpg (37.17 KB, 500x489, 500:489, 1462992556968.jpg)

 No.33605

Is violence in the form of self defense /unkind/?

When slapped, Jesus said "you may now slap the other side of my face". Hugging an agressor in the hope that you'll show him the power of kidness is very noble, but if you did that in real life you'd end up being killed.

What do you think?

 No.33606

>>33605

it is not as it will teach the agressor not to mindlessly attack other people again. therefore making him more /kind/


 No.33607

File: 86597662b94e968⋯.mp4 (6.89 MB, 640x348, 160:87, 86597662b94e968860d43738c9….mp4)

>>33605

>>33605

>When slapped, Jesus said "you may now slap the other side of my face"

Jesus was not referring to an actual attack on your life meant to injure you. This verse is about a bitch slap, an insult. If someone wants to provoce you, if someone wants to show you how superior he is, then he will slap you. In many moral systems, specifically all deriving from the traditional pagan germanic one as the example most relevant to white europides today, it is expected of the 'slapped' to reciprocate. In particular to deal out more than you received, to show that in fact you are the superior one which is adressed in another verse: "Tooth for tooth, eye for eye." Not tooth and eye for tooth ie, like the pagans would do

It is meant to teach us to not be provoced by these petty squabbles but to be humble in face of the evil of the world. Peace is more important than your personal ego, he was pointing this out by hyperbole, instead of going down this dark path leading to nothing good you can expose your opponent, you do not care, he has no power over you, he can have your other cheek if he wants to but you will not excalate the situation further.

—-

What he was not reffering to was letting your self be treated however your opponent pleased under any circumstances, not that you should not defend yourself, not pacifism, not that violence were wrong.

But most importantly he did not mean to prohibit you to fight for the things actually worth fighting for, he did not prohibit you to fight the enemies of God and everything that's good, he did not prohibit you from defending those within your responsibility or that need your help, those that cannot take care of themselves.

There are things worth fighting for, but this manifests itself in the fact that there are also things NOT worth fighting for, like your personal proud, that will devour you in the end if you are not careful. Making for yourself the choice to sacrifice your life, or to not defend yourself against aggression, this is something that under special circumstances my be justified and that you have to make up with your on conscience. But making this choice for others, failing to defend them were you could, bringing them in danger by remaining apathetic, not embracing the responsibility that you hold towards every human, can this be called anything but hybris and ultimately evil and sin acedia in itself?

Webm somewhat related. Ultimately it is your personal judgement that will determine how you have to deal with a specific situation you face. Sometimes this will mean bringing yourself in danger, or suffering patiently the evil of others, sometimes for their sake. In the end your actions have to allign with your conscience and your responsibility for God, so you can face the last judgement without regretting your actions.


 No.33608

>>33607

> and your responsibility for God

*before God


 No.33609

>>33607

why the spoilers?


 No.33610

Kind means [according to Dictionary.com]:

>having, showing, or proceeding from benevolence

>indulgent, considerate, or helpful; humane (often followed by to, eg. to be kind to animals)

By definition violence can't be any of the above, regardless of purpose. However, someone who as a gun in you face doesn't deserve kindness.


 No.33613

>>33605

It depends. If there are peaceful options for resolving the situation, then you shouldn't resort to violence. If all alternatives have been exhausted, then it's acceptable as a last resort.


 No.33619

File: 6b242c14af4e8f8⋯.png (412.72 KB, 1000x1000, 1:1, 6b242c14af4e8f871c3865fb9f….png)

>>33605

My kindness is reserved for loved ones, and children. Attempting to apply kindness to anyone else who is trying to hurt or kill you is a sign of mental deficiency.


 No.33670

>>33619

It is worth remembering that almost every atrocity in human history has been committed by someone thinking in that way. The armed robber is just trying to feed his family. The genocidal warlord is trying to help his kin. The terrorist is trying to get revenge for bombs dropped on his people. Everyone finds a way to rationalize their choices. Nobody is a villain in their own story. You should do your best not to be a villain in anyone else's either.


 No.33672

>>33670

>useless platitudes

If my life is at risk I won't care if the perpetrator thinks he's a "villain" or I'm a "villain". My goal in a situation like that is the end of that threat to my life. Being kind to someone who is trying to hurt/kill you is begging for your own suffering, and death. Your post reeks of the self righteous sanctimony of a sheltered child.


 No.33675

>>33672

Please go away.


 No.33677

File: ffa70c5e62c5871⋯.jpeg (87.94 KB, 677x637, 677:637, 0f8be9d26488d25f58ebc9edd….jpeg)

>>33675

Wow, rude! Even with the 'please'.


 No.33680

>>33605

In real life, Jesus got killed, too. But it was still the right thing to do.


 No.33774

File: 17060a7c7368a95⋯.png (1.31 MB, 800x4396, 200:1099, TheRacistKillingOfTrayvonM….png)

>>33672

>>33675

You're both being kind of /unkind/ to each other

>>33680

>In real life, Jesus got killed, too. But it was still the right thing to do.

I don't think you should hold people to the standard of divinity. Especially considering that being killed was of no consequence to Jesus.

I made a little comic about self defense a while ago. I hope it's not too inappropriate.


 No.33809

File: e479d0f121b21aa⋯.jpg (177.74 KB, 971x720, 971:720, e479d0f121b21aa535e2c779d4….jpg)

>>33609

I like to call them surprise boxes. They are meant to induce heart attacks in the reader :3

>>33610

>>having, showing, or proceeding from benevolence

Like selflessly defending others?

>>33670

> The armed robber is just trying to feed his family. The genocidal warlord is trying to help his kin. The terrorist is trying to get revenge for bombs dropped on his people.

The fact that you can understand why people are acting like they do is good, but it must not mean to be understanding towards their actions, if those actions are evil.

>>33774

>I don't think you should hold people to the standard of divinity.

But there is no other standard to be held to.

>Especially considering that being killed was of no consequence to Jesus.

Suffering the pain of the world seems like a rather harsh consequence to me.

can't flimflam the zimzam tbh


 No.33811

>>33774

funny comic. did you make it in paint.net?


 No.33812

>>33605

it's not /kind/, but it's necessary


 No.33816

File: 0348222f0cd7f18⋯.png (61.78 KB, 486x353, 486:353, 764684.PNG)

>>33809

>But there is no other standard to be held to.

Sure there is! See pic related.

Big Skyman is incomprehensibly immaculate and completely above selfishness. Whereas no human is actually selfless at an instinctual level. We only feel compassion and empathy because they helped our ancestors survive. You can't hold a child to the same standard as an adult.

>Suffering the pain of the world seems like a rather harsh consequence to me.

What does that even mean, exactly? Did he feel all the pain in the entire history of the world, both present and future, at that exact moment? And how does that even help us?

Seems like he just came down here for one shitty weekend, to be honest. We didn't even really get creative with hurting him.

If there is a god, then he must have created us for entertainment purposes. To watch some real desperation, terror, and triumph (an almighty being cannot triumph because he cannot lose). Seeing us get into fights now and then must therefore please the almighty.


 No.33817

>>33811

>funny comic. did you make it in paint.net?

Sorry for the double post, but yes. Surprisingly strong program!


 No.33818

>>33816

>Sure there is! See pic related.

This is no standard to be held to, it relies on other objective standards to be even valid, without those it is just illogical. Secular ethics do not make sense. Things like the categorical imperative do rely on metaphysical validation, otherwise they are meaningless. If there is no God, then there is no reason for me to not pursue my own interest whereever I see fit and jew my fellow man where I can. There is nothing wrong with crime, only with getting caught. If we assume there is no God, then it would not be in my best interest to follow the principle in your picture, rather I should not follow it but fool everyone around me into following it, and pretend to do so myself; this would be the reasonable approach.

>You can't hold a child to the same standard as an adult.

I see no reason to assume that bad things become ok when children do them. There may however be specific acts that have an altered meaning depending on the person doing them, which has no influence on the general principle, however.

>What does that even mean, exactly? Did he feel all the pain in the entire history of the world, both present and future, at that exact moment?

Yes. If you visit mass at easter they will go into detail about this.

>And how does that even help us?

I think we are getting to off topic here for me to answer this one in detail. >>>/christian/

>If there is a god, then he must have created us for entertainment purposes.

This is an assumption. I do not think that it correlates with the world we live in nor with the statements made by God on that matter. Rather the world was creaed to glorify God, and man to have a relationship with God and rule the world God created.


 No.33819

File: eb9a26cf4039626⋯.png (58.31 KB, 590x590, 1:1, 1453421319058.png)

>>33818

>off topic discuss

There's nothing wrong with it here as long as you keep it civil. Feel free to keep going, friend.


 No.33826

File: 8fe38e1019e0ed2⋯.jpg (672.54 KB, 2800x830, 280:83, 1442178618999-0.jpg)

>>33818

>If there is no God, then there is no reason for me to not pursue my own interest whereever I see fit and jew my fellow man where I can. There is nothing wrong with crime, only with getting caught.

Only if you do not feel empathy, sympathy, shame, pride, companionship, friendship, etcetera. Those are not merely mushy feelings, but evolutionary survival mechanisms, and the fabric of our very society. You make religious people out to be cowardly, selfish sociopaths who need to have the fear of a malicious supernatural entity put into them to keep them in line, and keep the rest of us safe.

>I see no reason to assume that bad things become ok when children do them. There may however be specific acts that have an altered meaning depending on the person doing them, which has no influence on the general principle, however.

The end result may be unquestionably bad, but the actor cannot be held entirely responsible. You're not suggesting we try a robot arm for murder because it crushed a factory worker? Or name it an "evil robot"?

>Rather the world was created to glorify God

Ah yes, and to have no other gods before him, for he is a jealous god. But if omnipotence and omniscience are no defense against egotistical insecurities, then I cannot see them defending against the boredom of infinity. Therefore we are "for laughs."

I was more interested in your interpretations of the Heysoos questions I asked. My area is protestant, would their interpretations even be in line with /christian/?

Picture not related but entertaining


 No.33827

>>33818

>If there is no God, then there is no reason for me to not pursue my own interest whereever I see fit and jew my fellow man where I can. There is nothing wrong with crime, only with getting caught. If we assume there is no God, then it would not be in my best interest to follow the principle in your picture, rather I should not follow it but fool everyone around me into following it, and pretend to do so myself; this would be the reasonable approach.

It sounds like you're operating mostly on the first two fundamental reward centers of human consciousness: desire for safety and Nietzschean will-to-power. I see it in your pattern of thinking "if I don't have to, then I will be malicious for my own pleasure". As a fellow hedonist I feel sympathy to you and therefore I'd like you to know there's so much more life to enjoy once you align these two fundamental reward circuits. The "high" you get from sense of safety and power is something very mundane relatively to the stuff you could potentially get. I've come to terms with these two evolutionary circuits using awareness meditation and ever since I'm high all the time. I had no idea music could feel like this.

It's because before all my neurotransmitter-resources were being spend on making sure I obsess about safety and power (fish and mammal brains respectively). If these reward centers were satiated and I'd drink some coffee, I'd could also get high on the third circuit (intellectualization, language, writing, calculating) or even fap (socio-sexual circuit).

But after some meditation my thought patterns have changed. Instead of getting high from neurotic tendencies, daydreaming, rationalizing what horrible things I can do for pleasure, I get high simply from looking at complex things like trees or pavement. I feel strong pleasurable connection to random people and music is so loud. When I read your post I just had to tell you this because I saw myself from the past in you. I'm just so glad I somehow got myself out of this sort of thinking "if there is no god, then there is no reason for me to not pursue my own interest". You only realize what a hell it is after you are out of it. You could be a billionaire and spend it all on pleasure and it would still be a horrible place to be relatively to aesthetic-sensory pleasure you could get after letting go. These derivatives of desire of safety and power aren't even true pleasure, indulging in them just makes stress go away, that's it.




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / asmr / egy / fur / polk / pone ]