Youtube comments of Sandy Clarke (@sandyclarke6685).
-
212
-
67
-
48
-
21
-
14
-
11
-
10
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
This guy isn't arguing that male/female isn't a biological fact; he's stating that the concept of what it means to be a man is conditioned - it's something we learn from a young age ("Stop crying - you're not a girl!"; "Boys don't wear pink", etc.) It's telling that many of the comments on here don't actually engage with the argument (that we're heavily conditioned through socialisation) but attack the guy personally or comment on his appearance. Children don't know what it means to be a man or a woman - much of these things are learned/conditioned. Does that mean a child doesn't have inherent preferences/orientations/personalities? No. They're not blank slates. But they're not born fully-developed and socialised, either.
An example of how we're socialised is found in sexual orientation. If I were to say (about a child) that they might grow up to marry someone of the same-sex, a ton of people would jump all over that with predictable comments. But young girls are given baby dolls and told they'll "grow up to marry a prince" and we think nothing of it. Why? Because we're socialised to believe and presume certain things about male and female babies from the start that might or might not be true, but so long as it fits the construct, it's fine. No-one blinks at the idea of assuming a young girl will grow up to have babies (presumed heterosexuality = good), but a single mention of the fact that there are LGBTQ children (sexual orientation, like personality, is fixed -and yes, you can behave differently to your orientation; it still doesn't change it) and again the predictable comments will come.
So, yes, most people are born biologically male/female (cue: "Most?! Lol" comments, demonstrating perfectly the point about socialisation), but the concept of what it means to be "a man" or "a woman" is defined and learned according to perspectives of the times. That's what this guy is arguing.
(I should say I'm not a huge fan of postmodernism - it can take things too far. Foucault made some valid points but he was a cult figure who was treated as if his words were infallible. Same can be said of Peterson - his 12 Rules contain some great food for thought, but be careful of the cult mindset - it can lead us to practise exactly what we criticise. Peterson's point about needing to stay away from any extremes is spot on.)
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
OK kiddos, let's learn the THREE key lessons to real mastery here from young Thomas. Save yourselves some time and gather round:
1. P.R.A.C.T.I.C.E.
Tommy plays guitar every day. Stephen King writes every day. Steph Curry shoots hoops every day. Mastery cannot come - and nor will it stick around - unless you put the work in and keep on putting it in. Too many kiddos these days want the results without the work. It doesn't happen without the work.
2. Stay Humble
Thomas is a genius that makes guitars weep with joy that they were crafted and fated to be touched by his nimble digits. And yet, he says there are lots of guitarists out there better than him. Which is true - there will be people better than him. And he recognises and accepts this. It's not self-deprecation - it's just acknowledging the reality. But...
3. There is no competition
Not even with yourself. It's true. All that "be better than you were yesterday" nonsense is the stuff of LinkedIn Losers trying to sound like Seneca. Thomas has ONE THING going for him that many don't: he does what he does because he enjoys it. If he's better or worse or the same as the next guy, he doesn't care. He just keeps doing his thing from the perspective that's right for him, and he gets better by virtue of doing just that. Stop comparing yourself to others. There will always be people with more, less; better, worse than you. Nobody cares. You have one life. Do the work, stay humble, and do it because it's what you want to do.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm off to cry because I can FEEL the envy coming from my own guitar. Stay safe, kiddos!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I get the sentiment behind this kind of messaging, but it's getting stale. The reality is that most people don't really care. They don't. Demonstrated by the fact that Trump is now on his way to a second term, populism is on the rise, the EU is floundering, and China is fast becoming the new Superpower. I recall a former economics lecturer telling the class, "So long as just enough people have just enough, there will be little incentive for change." And, as Milton Friedman said, "Show me a society that wasn't built/didn't thrive on greed?" I'm not saying I agree with these messages but they're pretty difficult to refute and I'm sorry but nobody is going to make Musk or Bezos or any other rich person pay their "fair share" in taxes or toe the line in whatever equity game you're trying to play. At best, it gives people like Bernie Sanders a platform to remain relevant. Grievances will always have an audience where victims and injustice are the main themes. But nothing will change. The people who are able to thrive or at least do reasonably well, will. But there will always be people who struggle to make ends meet. It's sad and in an ideal world there would exist viable equity among people, but it's simply not a dream that will be realised. Again, demonstrated by the fact that people like Bernie have been attempting to create "radical change" for decades and decades. How much closer to that radical change are we? People are driven mainly by self-interest and so long as they can survive and get by, that's all that counts. The people who read Das Kapital forget the other side read it, too, and they know how to game the system in their favour while keeping the population sedated and compliant.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
It’s interesting how quickly people leap to Tolle’s defence with little, if any, proper rebuttal of Dr. Grande’s points. Has Tolle helped a lot of people from their perspective? Sure. The same can be and is said about any prominent cult leader, politician, and other public figures such as Jordan Peterson or Joe Rogan. People attach strongly to figures they admire, often without question, because they give them psychological comfort. One way you can test this is to take someone you really admire and ask, “Where might their critics have a point? What are some of the limitations of this person’s ideas?” People find these questions super easy to answer when it comes to figures they dislike; however, when addressing those same questions about people they admire, it becomes much more difficult. Which is ironic, since it feeds into the kind of dualistic thinking and blind acceptance that teachings such as Buddhism (where Tolle borrows much of his teachings from) warn against. It’s the cult mindset. If you can’t find anything at all to question about a person’s ideas, that’s a huge red flag. There’s an entire Buddhist sutta devoted to that problem.
If you find Tolle’s work helpful, great. At the same time, he’s neither infallible nor beyond criticism and if you find yourself reacting strongly on the basis of Grande having “cone after” Tolle, then you are about as far away from “ego death” as you can be.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Is it free, though, _Longwinded? It costs time and effort and commitment and - if you only have one leg - arduous hopping, and if you walk as a means of distraction to walk away from your problems rather than confronting them, well, that costs a lot in terms of your well-being, and if you walk a mile in another fella's shoes then that'll cost you some freedom following your arrest. Now, I wouldn't say walking is entirely costly; there's no, for example, cost to putting one leg in front of the other unless you have a dodgy hip in which case, that's going to have a cost on the ol' joints. Now, of course, in extreme cases whereby you might find yourself living under dictatorship where the dictator loathes walking and threatens to put to death anyone caught taking more than 5 unaided steps within a 10 minute period, well, then that's going to lead to the ultimate cost. And you might say this is unlikely to happen but then nobody expected the advent of Pop Tarts, and yet here we are coexisting with the buggers, so you can never say for sure, really.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1