Fundamentally I think it has to do with cultural values.
In the US, we see the ambitious, driven person as the one who wants to work (at least) 5 days a week. We want to believe that outcomes are related to the amount, and not quality, of work put in. This value runs deep to cultural values where idleness is related to sin and “wasted” time[1]. Time spent in economically fruitful endeavors is viewed as important, while other time spent seen as frivolous. Today we see it manifested in startup culture where founders humblebrag about intense number of hours worked, like they’re the true believers in this value system. Larger company execs want to emulate them, hoping their employees show the same “hustle”. Many Americans often don’t even know what to do with their free time!
So in the US there’s a lot of cultural baggage to overcome.
(Of course, this value isn’t held in all cultures, where enjoying the finer things in life has cultural significance.)
we see the ambitious, driven person as the one who wants to work (at least) 5 days a week. We want to believe that outcomes are related to the amount, and not quality, of work put in.
I think this is one of those "my subculture is not the nation" issues.
Time spent in economically fruitful endeavors is viewed as important, while other time spent seen as frivolous.
I don't know if "frivolous" is the right word, but I know a contractor doesn't have PTO. His hourly rate is high enough he could take 4-6 weeks vacation and still make more than he would as an full-time employee (although that depends on the value of other benefits). Yet he still cannot bring himself to take a single day off because he "needs" the money.
People seeking a second job, or working crushing hours, are doing so hoping to get paid enough to escape the rat race and/or because they need that money to survive.
We want to believe that outcomes are related to the amount, and not quality, of work put in.
Actually, I don't think anyone believes that. People want to believe that outcomes are related to the utility of the work you do, which by and large they are.
Few people believe that those who jump and down over and over again in the hopes of flight will achieve success, but most people believe that if you get a pilot's license, you stand a chance to earn some money from it.
Oh yeah, all us Christians are really suffering. Truly we have maximized human suffering. It's just sad when you visit historically Christian countries to witness the maximal human suffering one could ever see in the world. Truly grotesque.
Only because modern Christianity has chosen to interpret the Bible in a more secular and liberal way. Stoning? No mixed fibers? Women’s place in the world? The Bible is completely savage. Don’t get me wrong, I’m glad you’re not following the Bible literally, but you’re a good person in spite of Christianity, not because of it.
This is nonsense, if you look even to the beginnings of Christianity, both the catholic and orthodox churches rejected stoning and the Jewish law very early on. The documentation of the rejection is written about in the bible.
If you want to argue that Jewish law is restrictive fine... Christians agree. It's written in the new testament. I'll leave it to a Jew to defend their laws.
The fact that anyone thinks Christians believe in following Jewish law speaks more to lack of education, not anything to do with Christianity.
Edit: i will point out these forms of Christianity also reject the authority of the bible in the way most protestants see it.
Well, Matthew 5:18 would tend to suggest that the Old Testament very much applies. But even if it doesn't, plenty of Christians continue to believe parts of the Old Testament, particularly when it comes to bashing gay people. So it's not my interpretation here that matters, I'm simply calling out what I see from Christians. But sure, I'll entertain a no true scotsman fallacy. Here's some verses from the New Testament only.
Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. Ephesians 6:5
Slaves, be subject to your masters with all reverence, not only to those who are good and equitable but also to those who are perverse. 1 Peter 2:18
The women are to keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak. 1st Corinthians 14:34
You should not use outward aids to make yourselves beautiful, such as the way you fix your hair, or the jewelry you put on, or the dresses you wear. 1st Peter 3:3
So if your eye—even your good eye—causes you to lust, gouge it out and throw it away. Matthew 5:29
Don’t store up treasures here on earth, where moths eat them and rust destroys them, and where thieves break in and steal. Matthew 6:19
Whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery. Matthew 5:32
So then, none of you can be My disciple who does not give up all his own possessions. Luke 14:33
A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety. 1st Timothy 2:11-15
Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him, but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For long hair is given to her as a covering. If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice—nor do the churches of God. 1 Corinthians 11:14-16
These are every single one from the New Testament, and I don't know a single Christian who actually really follows any of these verses. And good thing, too. I don't want them to. If they did, then, again, the world would be worse off.
Look up Mother Theresa. Look up the flagellants. Look up self-crucifixion. Look up penance in the Catholic Church (start here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cilice)
I'm well aware. The penitential practices are voluntary.
Mother Theresa did not try to run a hospital, but a hospice. Having visited India and seeing street conditions, letting people die with dignity providing them basic necessities is preferable to the deaths I saw on the street.
”In 2013, in a comprehensive review covering 96% of the literature on Mother Teresa, a group of Université de Montréal academics reinforced the foregoing criticism, detailing, among other issues, the missionary's practice of "caring for the sick by glorifying their suffering instead of relieving it, ... her questionable political contacts, her suspicious management of the enormous sums of money she received, and her overly dogmatic views regarding, in particular, abortion, contraception, and divorce". Questioning the Vatican's motivations for ignoring the mass of criticism, the study concluded that Mother Teresa's "hallowed image – which does not stand up to analysis of the facts – was constructed, and that her beatification was orchestrated by an effective media relations campaign" engineered by the Catholic convert and anti-abortion BBC journalist Malcolm Muggeridge.”
I agree with Mother Theresa on abortion, contraception and divorce, so I don't see why that's off-putting. Abortion, contraception and divorce increase the net suffering in the world (especially divorce should be obvious to everyone).
caring for the sick by glorifying their suffering instead of relieving it
Not all suffering is fixable. For many, this fact of life leads to depression and despair, Catholics have other views on it. Namely, that while suffering sucks, it has redemptive qualities.
Look... I know all suffering is not fixable. When your child dies, there's nothing you can do about it. It sucks. You can choose to hate life, despair, and wallow in self pity (which I've had ample amounts of), or you can choose to go with whatever it is has happened to you. I eventually chose the later, with the guidance of religion, and it is a much better path.
Abortion, contraception and divorce increase the net suffering in the world (especially divorce should be obvious to everyone).
What the oblivious shipping duck.
Do you really think abortion increases suffering? Think about the girl who got pregnant from rape. You’re forcing them to have that child, a permanent reminder of being raped. I assume you would also force the victim to marry their attacker?
Contraception. Do you really think suffering is lessened when teenagers don’t have access to condoms and get their girlfriend pregnant outside marriage and are forced to choose the child instead of education and vocation?
And divorce—you actually think it lessens suffering if two people who hate each other are forced to stay together and raise their children in a hostile, conflicted environment.
Take all that together and you have a family that’s based on sexual violence and men having absolute control over women and children.
Your stance makes it seem like you want kids to get in trouble so you can bash them with your good book because you get a kick out of it.
Comments
Fundamentally I think it has to do with cultural values.
In the US, we see the ambitious, driven person as the one who wants to work (at least) 5 days a week. We want to believe that outcomes are related to the amount, and not quality, of work put in. This value runs deep to cultural values where idleness is related to sin and “wasted” time[1]. Time spent in economically fruitful endeavors is viewed as important, while other time spent seen as frivolous. Today we see it manifested in startup culture where founders humblebrag about intense number of hours worked, like they’re the true believers in this value system. Larger company execs want to emulate them, hoping their employees show the same “hustle”. Many Americans often don’t even know what to do with their free time!
So in the US there’s a lot of cultural baggage to overcome.
(Of course, this value isn’t held in all cultures, where enjoying the finer things in life has cultural significance.)
1 - https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/idle_hands_are_the_devil%27...
I think this is one of those "my subculture is not the nation" issues.
I don't know if "frivolous" is the right word, but I know a contractor doesn't have PTO. His hourly rate is high enough he could take 4-6 weeks vacation and still make more than he would as an full-time employee (although that depends on the value of other benefits). Yet he still cannot bring himself to take a single day off because he "needs" the money.
People seeking a second job, or working crushing hours, are doing so hoping to get paid enough to escape the rat race and/or because they need that money to survive.
Actually, I don't think anyone believes that. People want to believe that outcomes are related to the utility of the work you do, which by and large they are.
Few people believe that those who jump and down over and over again in the hopes of flight will achieve success, but most people believe that if you get a pilot's license, you stand a chance to earn some money from it.
This is definitely the main driver. We must rid ourselves of the Xtian ethos, for it is a system that seeks to maximize human suffering.
Oh yeah, all us Christians are really suffering. Truly we have maximized human suffering. It's just sad when you visit historically Christian countries to witness the maximal human suffering one could ever see in the world. Truly grotesque.
Only because modern Christianity has chosen to interpret the Bible in a more secular and liberal way. Stoning? No mixed fibers? Women’s place in the world? The Bible is completely savage. Don’t get me wrong, I’m glad you’re not following the Bible literally, but you’re a good person in spite of Christianity, not because of it.
This is nonsense, if you look even to the beginnings of Christianity, both the catholic and orthodox churches rejected stoning and the Jewish law very early on. The documentation of the rejection is written about in the bible.
If you want to argue that Jewish law is restrictive fine... Christians agree. It's written in the new testament. I'll leave it to a Jew to defend their laws.
The fact that anyone thinks Christians believe in following Jewish law speaks more to lack of education, not anything to do with Christianity.
Edit: i will point out these forms of Christianity also reject the authority of the bible in the way most protestants see it.
Well, Matthew 5:18 would tend to suggest that the Old Testament very much applies. But even if it doesn't, plenty of Christians continue to believe parts of the Old Testament, particularly when it comes to bashing gay people. So it's not my interpretation here that matters, I'm simply calling out what I see from Christians. But sure, I'll entertain a no true scotsman fallacy. Here's some verses from the New Testament only.
These are every single one from the New Testament, and I don't know a single Christian who actually really follows any of these verses. And good thing, too. I don't want them to. If they did, then, again, the world would be worse off.
Look up Mother Theresa. Look up the flagellants. Look up self-crucifixion. Look up penance in the Catholic Church (start here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cilice)
I'm well aware. The penitential practices are voluntary.
Mother Theresa did not try to run a hospital, but a hospice. Having visited India and seeing street conditions, letting people die with dignity providing them basic necessities is preferable to the deaths I saw on the street.
Perfect should not be the enemy of better.
”In 2013, in a comprehensive review covering 96% of the literature on Mother Teresa, a group of Université de Montréal academics reinforced the foregoing criticism, detailing, among other issues, the missionary's practice of "caring for the sick by glorifying their suffering instead of relieving it, ... her questionable political contacts, her suspicious management of the enormous sums of money she received, and her overly dogmatic views regarding, in particular, abortion, contraception, and divorce". Questioning the Vatican's motivations for ignoring the mass of criticism, the study concluded that Mother Teresa's "hallowed image – which does not stand up to analysis of the facts – was constructed, and that her beatification was orchestrated by an effective media relations campaign" engineered by the Catholic convert and anti-abortion BBC journalist Malcolm Muggeridge.”
I agree with Mother Theresa on abortion, contraception and divorce, so I don't see why that's off-putting. Abortion, contraception and divorce increase the net suffering in the world (especially divorce should be obvious to everyone).
Not all suffering is fixable. For many, this fact of life leads to depression and despair, Catholics have other views on it. Namely, that while suffering sucks, it has redemptive qualities.
Look... I know all suffering is not fixable. When your child dies, there's nothing you can do about it. It sucks. You can choose to hate life, despair, and wallow in self pity (which I've had ample amounts of), or you can choose to go with whatever it is has happened to you. I eventually chose the later, with the guidance of religion, and it is a much better path.
Holy macaroni.
What the oblivious shipping duck.
Do you really think abortion increases suffering? Think about the girl who got pregnant from rape. You’re forcing them to have that child, a permanent reminder of being raped. I assume you would also force the victim to marry their attacker?
Contraception. Do you really think suffering is lessened when teenagers don’t have access to condoms and get their girlfriend pregnant outside marriage and are forced to choose the child instead of education and vocation?
And divorce—you actually think it lessens suffering if two people who hate each other are forced to stay together and raise their children in a hostile, conflicted environment.
Take all that together and you have a family that’s based on sexual violence and men having absolute control over women and children.
Your stance makes it seem like you want kids to get in trouble so you can bash them with your good book because you get a kick out of it.