Does anyone think there's something bigger going on than the Covid-19 itself?

[Chase]

@Zanardi,

And the same pushiness comes from the anti-vaccine people too, as far as I can see. If you take the vaccine, they'll just label you as a sheep and dismiss you.

People in general have grown very pushy about a lot of things lately. With the coronavirus stuff at the center of it.

It's been wrapped up into this radical cause for both sides:

• Pro-COVID vaccine: "If you're not vaccinated, you're dangerous/risky/irresponsible. I don't want you near me because you're amoral/a walking plague bearer."
  
  
• Anti-COVID vaccine: "If you're vaccinated, you're just handing over your rights and helping the slide toward totalitarianism. I don't want you near me because you're a cowardly sheep."

Depending on your vaccine status, you're probably getting more of one of those than the other.

But if you dislike radical "all or nothing" posturing, you're likely put off to some degree at least by the noise both sides are making.

If I was you, and dealing with "You're a sheep!" accusations, I would probably just stick with something like, "Eh, I just don't want to worry about the politics and I don't want to deal with the restrictions." Still unpalatable to someone "fighting the good fight", but at least you're more the guy in the center who is just following the path of least resistance, and not The Enemy.


@Will_V,

For me personally, the logic is even more simple. If the vaccine does its job, then it's the people who are at risk who need to get it, not me. For the very small minority of people for whom both the virus and the vaccine pose a risk (which must be a small fraction of the fraction of one percent who are at risk of dying of the virus to begin with), unfortunately the entire world cannot be changed to make accommodation, the same way it has not been changed thus far to accommodate people who fall into categories with far more numerous members, who face at least as much difficulties.

All sense of proportion has gone from this issue, and frankly, until it returns I am heavily biased against doing anything which even indirectly serves to keep it away. The real sickness here is not a biological one, and unfortunately for me, I live at its epicenter, exactly where the natural immunity is at its weakest.

That's sound logic. But there's a pro-vaccine answer for that: the vaccines don't work unless everybody gets vaccinated.

So simply by being unvaccinated, the reasoning goes, you put everyone else (vaccinated and unvaccinated alike) at risk.

Therefore, that reason "I don't need to because I'm not in a risk group" comes across as selfish.

The people most likely to be pro-vaccine have their moral structure heavily skewed toward the "care & fair" side of the moral spectrum, going by Jonathan Haidt's moral foundations theory. So you really want to avoid any kind of excuse that makes you sound like someone who is behaving in a self-interested way that could potentially (by their reasoning) harm or kill others.

That's why I like "I'm waiting for the 10-year longitudinal studies." It causes a bit of a mini-short circuit when care/fair people hear it. You're not refusing the vaccine, you're just waiting for more reassurances. Typically what happens at that point is they start trying to reassure you it is safe and you don't need longitudinal studies, which is a very different dynamic (and much easier to escape from) than someone accusing you of soulless villainy.

Chase

 

[The Emerald Archer]

@Chase

A little late to the party, but I must say that I really envy how you cut through the bullshit and get right to the heart of what's going on in the world.

I'm curious, how exactly can someone go about cultivating this skill?

For example, how you're able to describe both the right and left political perspectives so effortlessly, while also coming up with great retorts (like the one about waiting for the longitudinal study to use against the pro-vax folks; I never would've thought of a retort like that had you not pointed that out).

What are some ways to hold your frame against off-putting folks like this that you sometimes have to cross paths with like co-workers, bosses, childhood friends, and family/relatives, women, etc.?

Is there some extensive cognitive rewiring that a person has to go through by studying up on all sorts of cognitive biases/errors and reading up a bunch on history and philosophy to go with it?

Those probably seem like worthy pursuits in and of themselves, but what if you're someone who just doesn't want to be blindsided by pushy, off-putting folks who are trying to seize the moral high ground on you and/or morally shaming you?

Me personally, I just want to focus on self-improvement and becoming more professionally/financially successful, romantically successful, socially successful with good friends and a cool lifestyle.

However, I run into these types of frame battles a lot, especially in my family (then again, my family does appear to be lower on the empathy scale so that might have something to do with it...) and with friends from childhood.

Stuff like religion, politics, or how traveling is bad and dangerous because "everybody hates America" or you need a 9-5 job first before you can ever think about freelancing or entrepreneurship, or people trying to pressure to get married because you're closing in on 30, etc. Stuff like that.

I'm not necessarily someone who wants to be plugged into politics and hysteria 24/7. I just want to avoid losing status and social value by looking incompetent or having someone unscrupulous try to knock me down a peg and ladder-climb over me by resorting to societal conformity to push their frame on me.

The way I see it, learning how to better slice through political/world affairs BS like a knife through hot butter is invaluable both for:

• Frame control with girls and in groups/social situations, especially against low empathy/low-EQ folks (some of which are actually decently successful, but still off-putting)
• Getting ahead of the masses who get wrapped up in all of the hysteria and allow themselves to become distracted from self-improvement and from bettering their lots in life

What do you think about those reasons?

This has been somewhat of a "life sticking point" for me and any suggestions would be much appreciated.

(Also if anyone else has some opinions on how to better slice through political BS/paranoia or frame battles involving them you're welcome to share. I'd appreciate anyone's reasonable input on this.)

- Emerald

 

[Regal Tiger]

@Chase

A little late to the party, but I must say that I really envy how you cut through the bullshit and get right to the heart of what's going on in the world.

I'm curious, how exactly can someone go about cultivating this skill?



- Emerald

Not Chase, but here's my 2cents having been in similar positions with different topics.


In my experience it comes from understanding a topic well enough to the point where you can 'zoom out' a bit. You can see the bigger picture of whatever it is that you're talking about. Everything kind of slows down for you.

For example, most guys on here will experience this when it comes to gaming, or certain games (League of Legends is a GREAT example for this). At first, everything is so fast paced and there's so much to do that it's hard to keep up. But then you start to get a handle on different stuff and before you know it, the game itself is slowing down for you.

Same thing happens with just about everything.


Then, when you truly understand a topic you can start to see the threads that connect it with other stuff.

Seduction is a great example here because of so many things it connects to so naturally and effortlessly. Sure, seduction is mostly about women but you can use a lot of this stuff with your friendships and random people whom you have no intentions of sleeping with. In addition, people who really get into seduction will eventually find their way to 'inner game' issues. Where they will start to work on themselves as a man. Sure, at first it's because it makes us sexier to women but at the end of the day, there are people with some supremely shitty inner game that can still do at least ok with women.

But they're closely related.


And again, as someone who hasn't studied philosophy/history as much as Chase has, I'd imagine that it's a very similar process. He's able to rattle off these great examples because he's studied this stuff so much. He's, in a way, trained his brain to think about these things to a deep level and examples come easier because his brain is already primed for it.

Just like how someone who games a lot will have the game slow down.

Ultimately, it just comes down to creating neural pathways in your own mind related to whatever you want to be able to have a big understanding of. In a way, you're telling your subconscious mind that these subjects are important and your subconscious will work to bring more and more of those important things to your attention, which includes great examples.

Because your subconscious mind is always going. And the more you force it to work on something the better it's going to be at that thing and the easier it'll get. Which is what neural plasticity is all about! You're literally re-wiring your brain when you learn about new stuff!


EDIT: you can also think about learning a topic well enough as creating a 'lens' or 'perspective' that you can look at the world through. The example here is one of the old cliches:
If all you have is a hammer then everything looks like a nail

The goal here is to gather as many different 'tools' as possible. Tools and lenses here meaning different topics that you understand really well.


Here are my personal examples:
I've learned a great deal about psychology and you see that in my answer here. That is one lens that I see the world with. Another is photography and how I look at the world. I see how the lights look and will find myself framing things in my head to see what would make a great photo and what wouldn't.

Then finally, another which may catch you off guard is poetry. I don't study poetry or anything but I do greatly enjoy writing it. And it's caused me to shift perspectives on the world and see things differently.

Which is another thing that learning something in great detail will do for you. It'll give you a different perspective, or lens to see the world through.

Just in my examples there's 3 different lenses/perspectives to see the world through:
1) psychology and how the mind works
2) photography
3) poetry


Once you get to learning something you'll naturally start to see how they're connected. Because just like people in general, we're all connected in some way more or less. Kinda like the Kevin Bacon rule lol

 

[Headlines By Drake]

You are being a bit too nice @Chase when it comes to how the two sides react. From my observations, the unvaccinated and those against the vaccines rarely come out and call others sheep, they'd be destroyed for it in public if they did. Meanwhile, only this year when mandates were announced and I went into a coffee shop in Manhattan, some random Karen asked me if I have vaccinated and when I ignored her she called me a Trump supporter (which I am tbh).

What I have witnessed is that the unvaccinated do not really care, they just want to be left alone. You get some people who are vaccinated and want to live normal lives and not bother anyone. The issue is the loud militant pro-vaxxers who are roaring for more mandates and making enemies out of the unvaccinated. These people literally go around looking for fights. I also notice that they tend to be woke whites or Asians from privileged upbringings or liberal Karens with too much time on their hands.

These people likely lived very easy lives to the point where a virus about as deadly as the flu caused them to $hit their pants. They get the vaccine and now feel like they are superheroes who can boss everyone around. I rarely see this happen in working class communities, especially not in minority communities that would go overwhelmingly Democrat. In NYC you are slowly seeing that divide between Karens and Progressive Whites against the working class minorities who are pushing back against the mandates.

What the whole vaccine thing has done has made a group of weak spoiled people feel empowered and now they are actually letting that out in how they push other around with their vaccination status. Everything the left fought for when it came to communities of color and such is down the toilet, vaccination status is now at the top of their discrimination hierarchy. A straight white male who is vaccinated is more important than an unvaccinated black man.

I cannot help but think that the reason the vaccine mandates have been so successful is because they have empowered groups in a population that are normally spoiled, weak, and inefficient on their own. The middle-aged Karens, Woke Progressives that get worthless degrees, suburban males who are normally beta males, and spoiled middle class kids that just want to fit in and feel important.

I am glad I left NYC, the vaccine mandates were the main reason I did it. My fear is that wherever I go, there they will be flooding in. Just like how Californians flood into Texas and NYers flood into Florida.

At this point, I have tried to just zone out from it all and slowly distance myself. Solitude is truly a blessing.

 

[Headlines By Drake]

As easy as it is to be bitter, for anyone on this thread who has yet not been vaccinated, please count your blessings. I have not been vaccinated and wake up every day quite grateful. Meanwhile, I see nurses and all of these front line employees who are having the vaccines forced on them and have no say in the matter. I have no doubt that at some point, my company is going to mandate the vaccine for all even if you are remote.

Given how I read about the people that have died from the vaccine and the huge story Project Veritas has had on it all, I am hesitant to take it.

 

[The Emerald Archer]

@Regal Tiger

What's up, man? Thanks for your 2cents.

If I understand you correctly, the more understanding someone has of a topic, the more they're able to come up with retorts or opinions/perspectives because they've done the legwork?

And as a result of their having put in the time to learn/understand, their subconscious mind is now "tuned in" which makes it easier to hold your frame against people who are much less informed than you are? Am I reading your position correctly here?

That's the dilemma I'm getting at what is the most time-efficient way to get up to speed on current events and politics, but only to the point where I can prevent others from morally shaming me/wielding any sort of moral authority over me?

Also, being confident and able to hold the frame to the point where people won't be able to cause me to bleed social value/status/respect and just leave me the f*ck alone with their opinions and beliefs/values.

Not necessarily so I can become a political analyst or content creator or even win debates with people in day-to-day life (or on the internet haha). Ya feel me?

I'm primarily drawing from this fairly recent article by Chase: Are You Free or Do the Glowing Screens Direct You?

These parts in particular stuck out to me:

Things that Drain Your Lifeforce Away​

If you pay attention, I think you will notice these things:

• You become sluggish and unproductive once you've started checking media like this
• It's easy to fall into habits of repeatedly checking media throughout the day (for 'updates')
• Your emotions get worse the more time you spend on these media

and this part:

I'll still get things done even in a state like this, mind you. But I'll be B-game or C-game Chase instead of A-game Chase.

Like if someone decides to forego reading up on sensationalist news/politics to avoid ego depletion and getting emotionally riled up/drained, and instead channel that emotional energy into self-improvement, how do you get around feeling "left out of the loop" and feeling incompetent/vulnerable to social/moral attacks when everyone around you is trying to push you this way or that based on pop culture and current events?

I've seen Chase recommend LessWrong for better critical thinking. I love that website btw! Also, Lubbock's List seems like another resource to go to.

Are there any other resources like LessWrong and Lubbock's list to study up on and get a better "meta" or objective view that can help you be the contrarian and short-circuit people logically to the point where they can't throw you in this category or that?

I should note that I do enjoy studying up politics and philosophy and history. And I do agree with you Regal. If one wants to better debate/hold their ground they need to do their homework and understand the topic(s) really well. I just felt like I didn't articulate myself in my previous response the way I wanted to.

P.S. That's pretty cool you're into poetry. That sounds like a very creative/artistic interest! The kind that could increase your IQ by a couple of points.

These people likely lived very easy lives to the point where a virus about as deadly as the flu caused them to $hit their pants. They get the vaccine and now feel like they are superheroes who can boss everyone around.

Hahaha bro this part cracked me up! Even though I did get the vax (not gonna get any boosters tho), these people annoy the hell out of me too and these are exactly the type of people I'm talking about.

 

[Chase]

@The Emerald Archer,

Yes, both your reasons are good.

Well… I will tell you my thinking. Because everything stems from that.

First, I dislike being pushed into agreement with anything.

Second, I like to be right

Third, I don’t like to look wrong, which I might, even if I’m right, if I say the right thing in the wrong way.

So my default position is “’Tis better to hold one’s tongue and be thought a fool than to open one’s mouth and remove all doubt.” I have spent a lot of time around a lot of people with wildly different beliefs and opinions, and usually I opt to keep my opinions to myself. Even if I feel like I understand an issue better than someone else, unless I feel I have a really SOLID grasp on it, I am usually going to beg off sharing an opinion.

You need a decent understanding of psychology, too, but I don’t think it has to be too extensive. If you grasp a few points you will start seeing things differently.

Like, you should understand that when someone has STRONG opinions (doesn’t matter what they are), debating with that person is usually just going to lead to that person thinking you are an idiot.

You should also understand that people often do not arrive at their opinions rationally. They arrive at them emotionally. Opinions are frequently self-serving, and not arrived at so much by logic as they are by what serves the individual.

So, when you challenge someone’s opinion, especially if it is a STRONGLY-HELD opinion, you are essentially challenging this individual’s self-interest. Which prompts a defensive/aggressive reaction.

If you want to avoid triggering a self-interested reaction, you need to find some way to broach the issue without coming across as directly challenging the opinion.

Or if you want to directly challenge, the best way IME is by separating the person’s self-interest from his opinion. Like, when they were doing the refugee thing some years back, if you said, “We can’t let more of these refugees in!” and someone was pro-refugee, you’d trigger a defensive reaction, because the self-interest behind the opinion was “I’m a good person; I care for those in need” and listening to someone say “We shouldn’t care for those in need!” was like listening to someone say “We should be bad people!”

So what do you say?

You talk about how disenfranchised, marginalized, and alone those refugees will be after entry; about how they’re just being brought in so selfish people can feel good about themselves, and how they will never assimilate, mostly not have jobs, be socially pushed to the side, cast aside and forgotten by the people acting so happy they’re here. Then in a few years they’ll be unceremoniously shipped back. And you talk about how cruel it is to them, dangling this false hope, just so selfish people can feel good. It’s just cruel.

That works where other arguments do not, because most pro-refugee people were pro-refugee because they believed, “I am helping. I am doing a good deed.” When you attack the core of the opinion though: “Doing this is hurting. Doing this is a bad deed,” the person is no longer able to feel morally righteous upholding the opinion and either must try to justify why the deed is actually good (“No, you don’t understand…”) or backpedal from the position completely (“I never thought about that…”).

The fact is, there are a million arguments you could make in favor of refugees, or any position, and a million you can make against them.

You must choose the most EFFECTIVE argument for the listener you’re speaking with.

That is another crux of it.

Sometimes I find myself in a conversation about “Why should I learn pickup?”

I give very different answers depending on whom I’m talking with.

If I’m talking to a girl, I talk about guys suppressing their instincts in school and not going for what they want and not even being able to hear their own inner voice telling them what to do or listen to it. And that this process of using these tactics and strategies, by following a method, which is the same process they learned to follow in school, actually enables them to get back in touch with their instincts again and stop suppressing them, the way some guys who never fully bought into the schooling paradigm can. Women think that’s deep and profound and tremendously admirable.

If I’m talking to a guy, then it’s going to depend on his goals. I might talk about pickup as a means to an end: “Build the skills so you will always be able to do what you want with women for the rest of your life.” I might talk about it as an end in and of itself: “This is how you swim in pussy right now without needing a million bucks or 10 more inches of height.” I might talk about it as defiance against the system/freedom: “Break free from the programming and start actually getting what you want instead of watching life pass you by.”

Someone who’s a long-term planner will find the skill-building for a lifetime of results angle very appealing, the “swim in pussy right now” angle less so, because he cares about the future; the present is just what you do now to reach that future. Someone who’s a short-term pleasure/comfort focused person will not want to do a bunch of sacrificing of comfort to develop some long-term skill at all, but he sure would like to be swimming in pussy right NOW. Etc.

Stuff like religion, politics, or how traveling is bad and dangerous because "everybody hates America" or you need a 9-5 job first before you can ever think about freelancing or entrepreneurship, or people trying to pressure to get married because you're closing in on 30, etc. Stuff like that.

I would ask… do you need to argue on those?

For a lot of that stuff, I just fire off a simple smart-ass quip to signal I don’t want to discuss it:

HIM: Travel’s dangerous. Everyone hates Americans these days.
YOU: Yeah I know. That’s why I’ll tell everyone I’m French

HER: You NEED a 9-to-5 before you even think about working for yourself.
YOU: Well, I guess I’ve got a lot of work cut out for me then! First slaving away at a 9-to-5, then finally freedom!

HIM: You start thinking about marriage yet? You’re almost 30.
YOU: Oh, I keep thinking about it, but the thoughts keep coming back to alimony and child support payments!

I think the thing to keep in mind here is… people telling you their opinions are just people telling you their opinions.

You don’t have to do something just because someone told you you have to (unless he’s pointing a gun at you I guess).

I realize it doesn’t feel good to stay quiet when people give you unsolicited advice. However, you don’t really want to get into long discussions about that — it doesn’t benefit you, and it’s only going to create discord in your relationship with the other person.

Therefore, IMO, the happiest solution is just a non-committal quip that sort of sounds like you’re maybe agreeing with what they’re saying but also shows you’re not really on board, but either way it’s not really clear because you’re just joking. Most people will not press issues when you joke… at most they will say something like, “Well, I just hope you will take it more seriously, that’s all,” which you don’t so much have to respond to.


SUMMING UP

Here are the main rules for me, off the top of my head:

1. I don’t want to argue with people if I can avoid it. Arguing rarely changes minds, because people don’t hold their opinions due to facts. Not usually. People hold opinions due to emotions/self-interest
   
   
2. If I must argue, or I want to argue, I will do so first by separating self-interest from opinion. That means before I can even start I need to ask myself what this person’s self-interest is in holding this opinion and why he holds it
   
   
3. At higher levels of discussion, you can actually have mostly logical conversations with people about topics — but only topics they don’t have self-interest in. If there’s self-interest, it always influences people’s opinions, which makes arguments tricky and often futile without separating the self-interest first
   
   
4. Most of the time, it is preferable IMO to stay out of arguments. People can voice their loud opinions, and I will just ignore that. If they are going to talk to me directly, I smile and nod. They can assume I agree with them (many often do), they can assume they are ‘educating’ me and I’m learning from them, it doesn’t matter
   
   
5. If someone is being pushy about something and I need to respond to it, but I don’t really want to discuss it with him, a smart-ass quip will usually do the trick

As for arguing in general… I think it is good to study logical fallacies. We all make them. The better you understand them, the better you get at catching your own and avoiding them, and the better you get at identifying them in others, which stops you from getting sucked into long, stupid arguments over specious positions. This website is very helpful for that:

Thou shalt not commit logical fallacies

A logical fallacy is a flaw in reasoning. Logical fallacies are like tricks or illusions of thought, and they're often very sneakily used by politicians and the media to fool people. Don't be fooled! This website has been designed to help you identify and call out dodgy logic wherever it may...

yourlogicalfallacyis.com

On all the other stuff… how to think/analyze like I do… I’ve somewhat outlined a book on that, since guys keep asking for it. The tentative title is something along the lines of “how to be really lucky” since I have had people in my life who continually tell me I’m wrong, then I turn out to be right, and they assume it was luck, and then something else comes up where they think I am wrong, I turn out to be right, they assume that too was luck, and over and over (not to say I am always right. I’m not; I’m human and flawed. However, there are ways you can approach things that more often lead you to correct outcomes/solutions, even in murky/contentious areas, and if you approach them that way you can make moves and be right on things often enough you appear preternaturally fortunate to people who don’t understand how you knew those things when they did not).

I don’t have time to work on it now with the business and all. It’s the kind of thing you write for fun / your own edification (because then I have to look at how I think, which is… partly conscious, partly not, so there’s a lot of dredging stuff up into conscious awareness); I don’t really know if there’s a market for a book on thinking, unless you can make it simple and inoffensive enough. Can you do that without removing all the teeth? Won’t know until I start writing it.


@Headlines By Drake,

You are being a bit too nice @Chase when it comes to how the two sides react. From my observations, the unvaccinated and those against the vaccines rarely come out and call others sheep, they'd be destroyed for it in public if they did. Meanwhile, only this year when mandates were announced and I went into a coffee shop in Manhattan, some random Karen asked me if I have vaccinated and when I ignored her she called me a Trump supporter (which I am tbh).

What I have witnessed is that the unvaccinated do not really care, they just want to be left alone. You get some people who are vaccinated and want to live normal lives and not bother anyone. The issue is the loud militant pro-vaxxers who are roaring for more mandates and making enemies out of the unvaccinated. These people literally go around looking for fights. I also notice that they tend to be woke whites or Asians from privileged upbringings or liberal Karens with too much time on their hands.

When you're deep enough in one side, it will feel that way.

The militantly pro-vax people feel like their side is perfectly reasonable, and the anti-vax people are the pushy and unreasonable ones.

The militantly anti-vax people feel like their side is perfectly reasonable, and the pro-vax people are the pushy and unreasonable ones.

I have vaccinated people complain to me about pushy anti-vax people and arguments they keep running into.

I have people I know who are extremely pushy about highly conspiratorial anti-vax views. If you're not vaccinated, that's not enough for them. You need to be on board with this full set of corona-centered conspiracies they subscribe to or else you are still unenlightened / still having the wool pulled over your eyes.

It is tiresome dealing with extreme pushiness of all stripes, regardless which way you lean.

(and arguably the pro-vax people "started it"... with all the weird rules and mandates and moral posturing... but regardless who starts a war, once you're in it, the shells are falling from both sides, and you can forgive anyone getting hit by one of them not liking it)

Chase

 

[ulrich]

I don’t really know if there’s a market for a book on thinking, unless you can make it simple and inoffensive enough. Can you do that without removing all the teeth? Won’t know until I start writing it.

Scott Adams has a book called “Loserthink” on catching biased thinking in yourself and the media.
It’s actually pretty good… maybe not too deep while he stays away of leaning hard to any particular side.

It probably hangs from his “fame”, though.
Not sure if you would need some previous reputation to pull that off.

 

[Regal Tiger]

@Regal Tiger

What's up, man? Thanks for your 2cents.

If I understand you correctly, the more understanding someone has of a topic, the more they're able to come up with retorts or opinions/perspectives because they've done the legwork?

Exactly, although there are shortcuts you can make (although even those require at least a rudimentary understanding of whatever you're talking about)

And as a result of their having put in the time to learn/understand, their subconscious mind is now "tuned in" which makes it easier to hold your frame against people who are much less informed than you are? Am I reading your position correctly here?

Yup. Imagine asking a lawyer of 50 years what he thinks is about your situation that he has seen hundreds of times. He will be able to give you reasonable advice or a realistic answer. Stuff like that

That's the dilemma I'm getting at what is the most time-efficient way to get up to speed on current events and politics, but only to the point where I can prevent others from morally shaming me/wielding any sort of moral authority over me?

One of the shortcuts is understanding framing as well as people. It's a shortcut. And you have to be able to separate yourself from your argument and understand the other person's position.

In other words understand that people are in some ways arguing for themselves/situations. They get something out of it and it's your job to figure out what they're getting out of it while pointing it out. This is what's known as 'going meta'

BUt even that still requires at least some knowledge on a topic. And if you're up against someone with some true in-depth knowledge then you're going to lose

Finally, it requires being able to bullshit yourself. My first answer is the better one b cause you'll be congruent with yourself and your expertise. Basically, you'll have a rock solid frame (also why I mention that if you go up against someone that knows what they're talking about it'll require some SERIOUS verbal jui jitsu to win that argument)

Also, being confident and able to hold the frame to the point where people won't be able to cause me to bleed social value/status/respect and just leave me the f*ck alone with their opinions and beliefs/values.

This is more about framing and dominance. Knowledge doesn't even matter (to a degree, again it comes down to who you're up against)

Not necessarily so I can become a political analyst or content creator or even win debates with people in day-to-day life (or on the internet haha). Ya feel me?

I'm primarily drawing from this fairly recent article by Chase: Are You Free or Do the Glowing Screens Direct You?

These parts in particular stuck out to me:

and this part:


Like if someone decides to forego reading up on sensationalist news/politics to avoid ego depletion and getting emotionally riled up/drained, and instead channel that emotional energy into self-improvement, how do you get around feeling "left out of the loop" and feeling incompetent/vulnerable to social/moral attacks when everyone around you is trying to push you this way or that based on pop culture and current events?

Personally I follow one or two people who talk about it. They'll put out some videos and I more or less just watch the first 5 minutes/read the titles

I won't have a deep understanding about things this way, but I know of them in case somebody wants to talk about it. Plus it keeps me informed (to a very low level)

I've seen Chase recommend LessWrong for better critical thinking. I love that website btw! Also, Lubbock's List seems like another resource to go to.

Are there any other resources like LessWrong and Lubbock's list to study up on and get a better "meta" or objective view that can help you be the contrarian and short-circuit people logically to the point where they can't throw you in this category or that?

I should note that I do enjoy studying up politics and philosophy and history. And I do agree with you Regal. If one wants to better debate/hold their ground they need to do their homework and understand the topic(s) really well. I just felt like I didn't articulate myself in my previous response the way I wanted to.

P.S. That's pretty cool you're into poetry. That sounds like a very creative/artistic interest! The kind that could increase your IQ by a couple of points.

Thank you! I'm more abstract in how I think and it helps to have that outlet


- sent from my phone so I can't really check for typos and etc.

EDIT: forgot to mention that as far as arguing with people here's something else:

People attach their egos and sense of selves to their opinions. Which is why people who know nothing of a topic will basically die to defend it. They're defending themselves and their ego

Therefore, one way to help dismantle arguments is to find places where you can agree with the other person. Validate their egos and their sense of self. They'll be more open to listening to you after that

But that assumes that they're arguing in good faith. If they're not then why are you arguing in the first place? Just go with a flippant response like what Chase talked about and walk away.
-- Also he talked about figuring out why they're arguing for something and then talks about validating that. I think the example was of people crossing the border thinking they're doing good in the world. You have to validate that position if you want to honestly win someone over

Finally there's debating, which is a completely different animal. Debating is more for the crowd rather than changing minds/opinions and might be more of what you're after. Lots of stuff you can do here but keep in mind again, you're trying to win and dominate. You're not arguing in good faith in this case (which sometimes you have to do)

Personally, I like to practice debating on YouTube comments. It's low stakes and can get people really going sometimes. I try not to take it too far but I'm trying to win over readers, not change minds. So it is a bit devious, but hey, gotta have the skillset

-- again sent from phone so sorry about the format

 

[The Emerald Archer]

@Chase

Thanks for answering my question, Chase! I appreciate you taking the time out of your day to write that up.

First, I dislike being pushed into agreement with anything.

Second, I like to be right

Third, I don’t like to look wrong, which I might, even if I’m right, if I say the right thing in the wrong way.

I can relate to #'s 1 and 2. Believe it or not, I constantly get accused of "being right" or getting told "you always have to be right" lol.


In addition to those reasons you stated above, if I understand your breakdown of how you think correctly, you believe it's better to hold your tongue simply because of how most people form their opinions; emotionally instead of rationally, right?

And because people form their opinions emotionally (and not rationally), arguing with them is usually a waste of time because challenging their opinions is directly challenging their self-interest, which will provoke them to become aggressive/hostile and lead them to think you’re an idiot.

Unless you can separate that person’s self-interest from his opinion as you mentioned in the refugee example by showing empathy with refugees and mentioning that “pro-refugee” folks were for refugees coming in mainly so they could feel good about themselves, and completely lacking empathy towards the refugees.

And how this would lead to a person either:

• Trying to explain themselves (“No, you don’t understand…”)
• or backpedal from the position completely (“I never thought about that…”)

In either case, it makes it easier to hold your frame.

Furthermore, you must tailor your argument to the listener. Like you mentioned in the learning pickup example where you had different listeners with different goals.

Do I understand your perspective correctly here?

---

On this:

I would ask… do you need to argue on those?

After reading through your and Regal's responses it sounds like it's more trouble than it's worth. To answer your question, however...


Main Reason for feeling the need to argue:

If I had to boil down why I feel the need to argue on those, then I would say it's a defensive thing where I feel I need to protect my autonomy and shield myself from influences and beliefs/values that I don't want sneaking their way into my subconscious and leading me down a trajectory I don't want my life to go.

Also, some of your articles have drilled this into me as well.

I was re-reading your post on self-esteem the other week and these passages describe exactly what I'm going through:

While I was midway through writing this article (I actually started it a week or two ago, then threw it on the back burner for a while to work on a few other pieces), I had a conversation with a girl that landed right on this very topic. She mentioned to me that she blew up at her father, whom she hadn't seen in years, after he said something critical of her her first night back visiting her parents, and lamented that she wished she had a family that didn't beat her down, and that it had really affected her self-esteem and she'd probably be even more successful today if not for that.

and this one:

The study looked at teenagers, and found that self-esteem changes were predicted by combining how closely related a youth in a two-parent household felt to his or her father, and how much that father challenged the youth's freedom.

The closer you feel to a father, this study says, the more his challenges to your autonomy will both rein you in and wear you down.

And my guess is - based on the other research, and on my own experiences with people - that it isn't just parents with this effect. It's anyone in your immediate circle of influence (friends, lovers, consorts, teachers, bosses, colleagues, classmates).

Even before I read this research, I'd told that girl above that when you feel very close to someone, you let your guard down around him, and the things he says and opinions he holds of you have a much bigger impact than the same things said and opinions held by other people whose thoughts and deeds have to get through your mental filter before it's decided whether they're to be accepted or not.

For people close to you, their opinions of you don't get filtered much - or at all - and instead travel directly into your subconscious... and even change how you feel about yourself.

I believe you also touched on the same concept in your article True Freedom Means Many Weak Ties and Few Strong Ones right here as they relate to making money:

When I was surrounded by impoverished auto mechanics from redneck areas and the ghetto 50 hours a week for a year after high school, my world gradually shrank to fit with the world as they saw it, with larger aspirations beyond the not-much-more-than-minimum-wage world seeming ridiculous and grandiose and being a store manager looked like the best I could hope to achieve any time in the next 10 years of my life or so.

and here:

As I’ve modified my social circle to almost entirely other business owners in the online space, and primarily self-made multimillionaires, my perspectives on business have changed dramatically. The idea of slaving away in a low-wage job seems crazier and crazier to me... but only because I see so many successful people around me, and so many different and clear paths toward success.

And these viewpoints are mutually exclusive; a self-made millionaire surrounded by other self-made millionaires trying to tell a minimum-wage guy surrounded by other minimum-wage guys that getting rich is actually pretty easy looks to that minimum-wage guy like he’s lost in his own world, or just was lucky or privileged but somehow mistakenly attributes this luck or privilege to his own non-existent “skill.”

In a nutshell, I want to avoid what you described in those quotes.

That is the #1 reason why I feel the need to argue and push back on unsolicited advice or judgments/criticisms aimed at my choices in life.

Furthermore, I don't want other people's limiting beliefs seeping into my subconscious and changing how I feel about myself, or influencing me to make decisions that lead to me living a life that isn't what I want. I don't want to be influenced at a subconscious level by mental models/worldviews that I am trying to break free from.

(I should also note that this involves mainly my family, the people closest to me. This means their opinions and unsolicited advice won't get filtered as strongly as you mentioned in the passage above from the self-esteem article).

This is also the main reason why I've been a lone wolf at heart most of my life. I've learned social skills to a pretty good degree where I can navigate myself in environments better than the average person, but I don't let myself get too close to people because I don't want to inherit the everyman's worldview.

And I still have quite a bit of leveling up to do professionally/financially and romantically to get to the point where I can be "on the level" of successful/ambitious, "elite" level guys.

But yeah, that's is my top reason: a defensive/protective mechanism to protect my autonomy, agency, confidence, and self-esteem.


Main Reason #2 for feeling the need to argue:

I am constantly trying to stomp out nice-guy, pushover behavior. I am trying to reach the point of a genuine man. I'm going off your checklist from this thread here: What it truly means to be Genuine? Thoughts.

Here's what I'd consider the "I think I'm genuine but haven't been much of a jerk; do I need to be a jerk?" checklist (it's a common question for guys who don't really want to be assholes and are already reasonably well calibrated socially, I feel like):

Can you, without being a dirtbag about it:

• Speak up and differ with anyone without worrying about being disliked?
• Voice politically incorrect sentiments that people nevertheless see the logic in?
• Point people's problems out to them clearly and unequivocally, in no uncertain terms?
• Peel people (and girls) off of groups and onto private places?
• Lead strongly and decisively, without tiptoeing around?
• React with moral force on a hairpin?
• Cut through the fog when everyone else is dancing around the issue?
• Control the frames of your interactions at the meta level?

If you can do these things without being a jerk or asshole, and you can do them without having to overcome a lot of nervousness or unease, you're genuine.

If you hold back from telling people things they need to hear but you're afraid might offend them, or you stifle your thoughts because you don't think people will like what you have to say, you're not there yet, and 99% of the time will need to go through a jerk/asshole phase first.

When people give me unsolicited advice or push their opinions on me in a very off-putting way, I feel the need to speak out and argue because of those bullet-points in bold above from that checklist.

I feel that I hold my tongue a little too much, and therefore, I feel like I'm violating those bullet-points above:

• speaking up without worrying about being disliked
• stifling my thoughts because people will get upset or think I'm weird

Do you see where I'm coming from with all of this?


I'm beginning to think maybe I'm interpreting what you wrote in those quoted passages above too literally, or otherwise missing some context here. If so, please feel free to point it out.

Sounds like I could also afford to mature more as a man with these types of things as they relate to people, and less pettiness/getting pulled into things that prove to be unproductive (like arguments and being opinionated).

Anyways, I hope I was able to provide some insight and clarity on my argumentative tendencies and disagreeableness haha.

Going forward, I think I'm just going to adopt what you said about holding my tongue and using the smart-ass quips when someone is being extra pushy with their opinions.

---

@Regal Tiger

Even though there are shortcuts you can take to better hold frame/argue, you still need a basic understanding of what the hell you're talking about right?

One of the shortcuts is understanding framing as well as people. It's a shortcut. And you have to be able to separate yourself from your argument and understand the other person's position.

In other words understand that people are in some ways arguing for themselves/situations. They get something out of it and it's your job to figure out what they're getting out of it while pointing it out. This is what's known as 'going meta'

BUt even that still requires at least some knowledge on a topic. And if you're up against someone with some true in-depth knowledge then you're going to lose

Finally, it requires being able to bullshit yourself. My first answer is the better one b cause you'll be congruent with yourself and your expertise. Basically, you'll have a rock solid frame (also why I mention that if you go up against someone that knows what they're talking about it'll require some SERIOUS verbal jui jitsu to win that argument)

EDIT: forgot to mention that as far as arguing with people here's something else:

People attach their egos and sense of selves to their opinions. Which is why people who know nothing of a topic will basically die to defend it. They're defending themselves and their ego

Therefore, one way to help dismantle arguments is to find places where you can agree with the other person. Validate their egos and their sense of self. They'll be more open to listening to you after that

But that assumes that they're arguing in good faith. If they're not then why are you arguing in the first place? Just go with a flippant response like what Chase talked about and walk away.
-- Also he talked about figuring out why they're arguing for something and then talks about validating that. I think the example was of people crossing the border thinking they're doing good in the world. You have to validate that position if you want to honestly win someone over

Finally there's debating, which is a completely different animal. Debating is more for the crowd rather than changing minds/opinions and might be more of what you're after. Lots of stuff you can do here but keep in mind again, you're trying to win and dominate. You're not arguing in good faith in this case (which sometimes you have to do)

Personally, I like to practice debating on YouTube comments. It's low stakes and can get people really going sometimes. I try not to take it too far but I'm trying to win over readers, not change minds. So it is a bit devious, but hey, gotta have the skillset

Ok sweet! Makes sense. Thanks for laying out those reasonings down.

Sounds like a lot of overlap with what Chase was talking about in his response, particularly about the ego/self-image part when it comes to people's opinions. That's where I'm trying to have more empathy so I can avoid a lot of interpersonal hassle.

Noted on the debating being for an audience. Sounds like a different beast than mincing words with friends/family.

Personally I follow one or two people who talk about it. They'll put out some videos and I more or less just watch the first 5 minutes/read the titles

I won't have a deep understanding about things this way, but I know of them in case somebody wants to talk about it. Plus it keeps me informed (to a very low level)

If you don't mind me asking, who do you follow?

I'm partial to Scott Adams. And Joe Rogan's podcast too because of the diverse amount of guests and perspectives. Also, how Rogan isn't afraid to ask tough questions

Although I feel like answering with Joe Rogan makes me sound like a typical bro haha oh well.

 

[Regal Tiger]

@The Emerald Archer
I follow Tim Pool

Although these past few months I've definitely noticed a change for the worse in his content. I'm not the only one either

More times than I believe should be necessary I seem to get more info out of his comment section than I do the video. So I'm probably gonna end up dropping him if he doesn't shape up

But he does have a lotta sources. News Guard he mentions a lot. Then there's another I wish I remembered the name of where it'll show you a story and then show a bunch of different outlets covering it as well as show you which side they tend to lean towards

 

[Zoro]

My biggest problem with the situation is that I’m trying to get on my feet financially and turn my life around overcoming an addition. Now the state of things has me fearfuland going through an existential crisis of what the point of it all is.

It’s really demotivating and not great for my recovery, not productive for learning game, not encouraging for my financial life.

My mind goes off the deep end with conspiracies and I do not even read up on that kind of stuff or watch the news. I really just want to live my life.

Do you guys have suggestions on how to deal with my fear? I think that’s really the first step for me. If I can manage my fear and become more grounded, then I can do whatever it is I should be doing.

My personal fears of the future, has me losing hope, I see no way to live the life I desire (that may be untrue and that what I want is possible) and that has me running to my addictions, instead of having enough hope and groundedness to overcome my problems. I don’t want to let this feeling of hopelessness drive me down my own rabbit hole anymore.

 

[The Emerald Archer]

@The Emerald Archer
I follow Tim Pool

Although these past few months I've definitely noticed a change for the worse in his content. I'm not the only one either

More times than I believe should be necessary I seem to get more info out of his comment section than I do the video. So I'm probably gonna end up dropping him if he doesn't shape up

But he does have a lotta sources. News Guard he mentions a lot. Then there's another I wish I remembered the name of where it'll show you a story and then show a bunch of different outlets covering it as well as show you which side they tend to lean towards

Nice! I like Timcast too, although I haven't been tuning in as much lately.

But yeah, I know what you mean about the comments section lol. It's funny how you can learn a lot about someone from the comments in the audience. Like how they mention Tim constantly interrupts his guests or makes comments/statements that are unnecessary just to try to bring the focus back on himself because it's his show, or how he comes off as too much of a know-it-all, etc. Those commentators can be brutal to Tim haha.

I also noticed the same thing with Scott Adams. He seems to have watered down his opinions to better toe the party line and cater to Big Tech. I think a lot of content creators are trying really hard to toe the party line nowadays because everyone is so afraid of getting cancelled/censored.

On the one hand, I get it, because they've dumped loads of time/energy/money into making their channels/business successful and don't want to have it ripped away from them. But at the same time, it makes them come off as less sincere and genuine, maybe even as a "sellout" to the more cynical among us.

@J Wick

The addiction sounds rough man. I can totally relate to the struggling to get on your feet financially. That's been the story of my life these past several years since graduating college (although, I have mainly myself to blame for that smh).

But yeah, kinda tough to focus on game/pickup when you're constantly stressed out and going through an existential crisis.

On the conspiracy theory bit, I'm not sure which ones you're referencing, but it seems like being strict about cutting out any and all sensationalist news/social media/content creators and influencers would be a start. But it seems you already do that...

As for fear, have you tried fear-setting? It's similar to goal-setting but instead, you set and define your fears instead of your goals (it all kind of integrates). I believe Tim Ferriss is the one who popularized it. Here are some articles I have bookmarked on fear-setting you could check out:

• Fear-Setting: The Most Valuable Exercise I Do Every Month
• How to Conquer Your Fears and Take Action (Tim Ferriss’ Fear-Setting Exercise)

I'd have to ask though, what exactly are you most fearful of and how is the pandemic playing on that fear? Like are you afraid that you won't be able to find a job/make money and be forced to live with family or roommates that you don't like or want to be around? Afraid that you won't be able to kick your addiction?

 

[Headlines By Drake]

Well, just got the announcement this past Friday that the company has mandated the jab for all employees since we have almost a 1,000 employees. This includes all remote employees who do not have any plans of coming into the office. I have a few months of savings to spend on rent plus living, did the month and it comes out to 6 months total before I run dry. At that point I will have to pull from my crypto investments in order to pay off the remainder of my rent. What makes it tough is that I built up such a successful career here and after almost 3 years, I am up for another promotion and pay bump.

I have had so much going on in my mind around this decision. What if the mandates get so bad, thankfully I am in a red state, to where I have to present proof of vaxx to eat inside like I would have to in NYC. It's like outside of the Southwest success story, which was actually not that significant since new employees still need the vaxx, I feel so outnumbered. It has gotten to the point where I have googled which vaccine is the safest.

They are not accepting negative COVID tests and it is highly unlikely that I qualify for an exemption.

It is so tough of a decision to make because I have read so much about how the vaccines bring on blood clots and people have actually died from taking them. The people close to me seemed to be fine but I feel like I am in a corner where I either lose or lose.

If I do not get it, I lose my job and a promotion, not to mention a jumpstart and huge jump in a very promising career.

If I do get it, not only do I put my health in danger, I feel like everything I stood for in the past has fallen apart.

This whole ordeal has made me empathize with politicians so much. It is tough to walk away from money, status, and glory that comes your way and actually do the right thing. Doing the right thing is so tough and so difficult that it makes so much sense why any politician is so easy to corrupt. Meanwhile, here I am.

If I do not take the vaccine then I have at most 6 months in my bank account to take care of my rent and living expenses before I run dry. All the while having no health insurance and getting off a great 401k plan. If I do take it, everything I stood for was a farce and I have to gulp down the idea that I compromised on my beliefs in a big way.

 

[Skills]

Well, just got the announcement this past Friday that the company has mandated the jab for all employees since we have almost a 1,000 employees. This includes all remote employees who do not have any plans of coming into the office. I have a few months of savings to spend on rent plus living, did the month and it comes out to 6 months total before I run dry. At that point I will have to pull from my crypto investments in order to pay off the remainder of my rent. What makes it tough is that I built up such a successful career here and after almost 3 years, I am up for another promotion and pay bump.

I have had so much going on in my mind around this decision. What if the mandates get so bad, thankfully I am in a red state, to where I have to present proof of vaxx to eat inside like I would have to in NYC. It's like outside of the Southwest success story, which was actually not that significant since new employees still need the vaxx, I feel so outnumbered. It has gotten to the point where I have googled which vaccine is the safest.

They are not accepting negative COVID tests and it is highly unlikely that I qualify for an exemption.

It is so tough of a decision to make because I have read so much about how the vaccines bring on blood clots and people have actually died from taking them. The people close to me seemed to be fine but I feel like I am in a corner where I either lose or lose.

If I do not get it, I lose my job and a promotion, not to mention a jumpstart and huge jump in a very promising career.

If I do get it, not only do I put my health in danger, I feel like everything I stood for in the past has fallen apart.

This whole ordeal has made me empathize with politicians so much. It is tough to walk away from money, status, and glory that comes your way and actually do the right thing. Doing the right thing is so tough and so difficult that it makes so much sense why any politician is so easy to corrupt. Meanwhile, here I am.

If I do not take the vaccine then I have at most 6 months in my bank account to take care of my rent and living expenses before I run dry. All the while having no health insurance and getting off a great 401k plan. If I do take it, everything I stood for was a farce and I have to gulp down the idea that I compromised on my beliefs in a big way.

Dude just get the vaccine, vs losing your job, none of that is likely to happen, blood clogs and stuff

 

[Headlines By Drake]

Dude just get the vaccine, vs losing your job, none of that is likely to happen, blood clogs and stuff

I've thought about it. Likely going to get the Johnson and Johnson one since it is only 1 shot and they seem a lot less corrupt than Pfizer and Moderna. My other reasoning is I might as well have to get it way down the road anyways. Coercion wins.

 

[trashKENNUT]

I have read so much about how the vaccines bring on blood clots and people have actually died from taking them. The people close to me seemed to be fine but I feel like I am in a corner where I either lose or lose.

Take this analogy as a helpful tool. When you sell 1,000,000 iphones, Having 500 spoilt phones will make you think that Apple, sucks.

People are anti vax because of bigger implications down the road, not the vax itself. The vax itself is as i mentioned above.

In case, i am not pro-vax. It's a hard decision. All of us might be in one of the 500 spoilt iphones. And it's not because governments are all evil. It's because this is like approaching girls. You really don't know. I recommend getting an additional doctors advice on your medical conditions. Then make a decision

Bless Everyone.

z@c+

 

[Will_V]

Well, just got the announcement this past Friday that the company has mandated the jab for all employees since we have almost a 1,000 employees. This includes all remote employees who do not have any plans of coming into the office. I have a few months of savings to spend on rent plus living, did the month and it comes out to 6 months total before I run dry. At that point I will have to pull from my crypto investments in order to pay off the remainder of my rent. What makes it tough is that I built up such a successful career here and after almost 3 years, I am up for another promotion and pay bump.

I have had so much going on in my mind around this decision. What if the mandates get so bad, thankfully I am in a red state, to where I have to present proof of vaxx to eat inside like I would have to in NYC. It's like outside of the Southwest success story, which was actually not that significant since new employees still need the vaxx, I feel so outnumbered. It has gotten to the point where I have googled which vaccine is the safest.

They are not accepting negative COVID tests and it is highly unlikely that I qualify for an exemption.

It is so tough of a decision to make because I have read so much about how the vaccines bring on blood clots and people have actually died from taking them. The people close to me seemed to be fine but I feel like I am in a corner where I either lose or lose.

If I do not get it, I lose my job and a promotion, not to mention a jumpstart and huge jump in a very promising career.

If I do get it, not only do I put my health in danger, I feel like everything I stood for in the past has fallen apart.

This whole ordeal has made me empathize with politicians so much. It is tough to walk away from money, status, and glory that comes your way and actually do the right thing. Doing the right thing is so tough and so difficult that it makes so much sense why any politician is so easy to corrupt. Meanwhile, here I am.

If I do not take the vaccine then I have at most 6 months in my bank account to take care of my rent and living expenses before I run dry. All the while having no health insurance and getting off a great 401k plan. If I do take it, everything I stood for was a farce and I have to gulp down the idea that I compromised on my beliefs in a big way.

I'm not quite in the same position as you, but here's how I look at it.

First, I would ask myself what I really wanted for my future. If the career and 401k and all that is what you definitively want, then cool. But if you are going to spend another few years in your career before deciding that actually you want to strike out on some other course, escape the rat race, build your own business etc, then now's probably the best time to do it.

I already have my own online business, and no plans for a career at any company except my own, so I have already made my choice.

The fact is that (so far) the negative effects of the vaccine are very few and far between. I don't know how it compares to covid, I calculated that my chances of fatality from the virus, based on my age, are 1/10,000, or 100th of 1 percent, which are odds I'm perfectly happy with (it's substantially better than that, because I am far healthier than average, but anyways). But overall, the actual known risks from either the virus or the vaccine are both very small.

For me, the vaccine and the virus are both simply options with associated risks. The technical reason why I don't go for the vaccine is because of my understanding that it's far easier to cause damage to the health of a person with a good immune system when you bypass most of the barriers to entry that a virus would have to cross. The covid virus would have to run the usual gauntlet, but the vaccine doesn't. Besides which, while the virus has to conform to a certain level of natural form in order to survive and proliferate (which suggests to me a certain level of consistency with the body's natural defenses), a vaccine could literally be anything at all, something which would never otherwise be able to move around or get into the human body in the first place.

The main reason I don't go with the vaccine though, is simply my objection to someone else practically getting to decide what goes into my body. If there is any breach of liberty that goes further than that I don't know what it is. This is a strong ethical objection, but as with most ethical standpoints, one must always spend or dispose of a certain amount of one's resources and opportunities to defend it. The question is, is it worth the downside? That's a question everyone must answer for themselves, because the suffering incurred by crossing one's own ethical boundaries is for them alone.

I haven't ruled out ever taking the vaccine. Most of the people I know and my family have already taken it. The risks of it don't bother me too much - we all die eventually, and I probably have far more chance of getting run over by traffic than dying from either the virus or the vaccine. But I am more interested in being true to myself, and living life on my terms, than either taking or avoiding risk. And I am not comfortable at all with the level of coercion going on, and what it might mean for the future of freedom of choice in how to live one's life. So that is where I stand on it.

PS Chase's advice on how to deal with people talking about the vaccine works, I was talking to someone who I've spoken to multiple times about it and usually there's a sense of discontent and impasse in the conversation, but when I focused on the lack of long term study thing they agreed with me and the vibe was much better ..

 

[Winston]

The problem with the vaccine is that this is highly likely to be a recurring thing.

Risks health will be recurring over time, and possibly compouding. And at some point it might cross a kind of treshold that might trigger serious health problems. This is not because someone is still alive and with no apparent side effects, that the jab was health neutral.

I think health is best seen as a capital, and every time one take this jab, it is consuming his health capital. Taking the jab is is not a binary outcome event, and this will be a recurring game.

 

[Train]

Well, just got the announcement this past Friday that the company has mandated the jab for all employees since we have almost a 1,000 employees. This includes all remote employees who do not have any plans of coming into the office. I have a few months of savings to spend on rent plus living, did the month and it comes out to 6 months total before I run dry. At that point I will have to pull from my crypto investments in order to pay off the remainder of my rent. What makes it tough is that I built up such a successful career here and after almost 3 years, I am up for another promotion and pay bump.

I have had so much going on in my mind around this decision. What if the mandates get so bad, thankfully I am in a red state, to where I have to present proof of vaxx to eat inside like I would have to in NYC. It's like outside of the Southwest success story, which was actually not that significant since new employees still need the vaxx, I feel so outnumbered. It has gotten to the point where I have googled which vaccine is the safest.

They are not accepting negative COVID tests and it is highly unlikely that I qualify for an exemption.

It is so tough of a decision to make because I have read so much about how the vaccines bring on blood clots and people have actually died from taking them. The people close to me seemed to be fine but I feel like I am in a corner where I either lose or lose.

If I do not get it, I lose my job and a promotion, not to mention a jumpstart and huge jump in a very promising career.

If I do get it, not only do I put my health in danger, I feel like everything I stood for in the past has fallen apart.

This whole ordeal has made me empathize with politicians so much. It is tough to walk away from money, status, and glory that comes your way and actually do the right thing. Doing the right thing is so tough and so difficult that it makes so much sense why any politician is so easy to corrupt. Meanwhile, here I am.

If I do not take the vaccine then I have at most 6 months in my bank account to take care of my rent and living expenses before I run dry. All the while having no health insurance and getting off a great 401k plan. If I do take it, everything I stood for was a farce and I have to gulp down the idea that I compromised on my beliefs in a big way.

Look into religious or medical exemptions. Same is happening at my company too and I'm going through the same. I can send you wording I used.

I'm also worried about the unnecessary risk and also the need to take booster after booster if they change the definition of "fully vaccinated."