Jump to content

A whole year after...


KookyFox
 Share

Recommended Posts

Welp, we're November the 23rd 2015, it's now been 365 days since I've started involving myself actively in the fandom (i.e. created my FA account, joined FAF, started drawing anthros...)

So much happened, and so much change in my life ever since that date. I met friends all across the globe, I lost one, found love, sent gifts, recieved some too... I drew a a few pics, though I'm not so productive, I started uploading my music too. Furries became my second family, here and abroad. If it was not for the fandom I would be on the street as we speak.

As I said way too much happened, lots of furry joy, lots of furry drama. The new forums... so much just so much. And when I look back at this year I find myself wondering what will happen in the next. I'm sure things are gonna get even more drastic, will I get to meet more of you? I sadly doubt it. Will I go to a convention? That I doubt too.

One of the biggest pains of having friends spread across the globe is that it gets hard to ever see them. Borders, paperwork, travel costs, obligations back home....
But it's also one of my biggest prides, knowing that wherever I go I will be close to someone who matters to me, and whom I matter to.

 

1 year, it's nothing, but it still gave me all I wanted.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whelp you've seen the good part. Now it's only a matter of time until the bad part seeps out from under the covers and you enter a downward spiral of cynicism.

Cynicism only takes root from unrealistic expectations of others and a similarly idealistic belief that things should be a certain way.

This is only compounded by the fact that most cynics incorrectly believe themselves to be realists.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cynicism only takes root from unrealistic expectations of others and a similarly idealistic belief that things should be a certain way.
This is only compounded by the fact that most cynics incorrectly believe themselves to be realists.

I digress.

Cynicism is an end result of being let down by too many people, even with realistic expectations.

I consider myself pretty jaded, pessimistic and cynical due to a lifelong string of disappointments, letdowns and failures, of which very few have been "unrealistic", or would you argue that expecting people, for example, stick to promises and scheduled events to be unrealistic?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I digress.

Cynicism is an end result of being let down by too many people, even with realistic expectations.

I consider myself pretty jaded, pessimistic and cynical due to a lifelong string of disappointments, letdowns and failures, of which very few have been "unrealistic", or would you argue that expecting people, for example, stick to promises and scheduled events to be unrealistic?

>people regularly fail to live up to promises, and scheduled events

>expecting people to live up to promises and scheduled events.

That is the very definition of unrealistic, your expectations were unrealistic from the outset even if you didn't have the experience to inform you of that fact beforehand.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

>people regularly fail to live up to promises, and scheduled events
>expecting people to live up to promises and scheduled events.

That is the very definition of unrealistic, your expectations were unrealistic from the outset even if you didn't have the experience to inform you of that fact beforehand.

I don't know where you live, but where I'm from, it's a test of one's worth to live up to their word.

Promise by definition is something that's supposed to be kept no matter what. Pretty much the same applies to schedules. Of the latter, missing them is common I know, but not informing about delays and such when they'd be able to gnaws a person.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know where you live, but where I'm from, it's a test of one's worth to live up to their word.

Promise by definition is something that's supposed to be kept no matter what. Pretty much the same applies to schedules. Of the latter, missing them is common I know, but not informing about delays and such when they'd be able to gnaws a person.

Uh, it's a universally preferable outcome that someone stays true to their word, so I don't know what you're trying to suggest about my locale. Preferable doesn't carry a connotation of being realistic or indicative of a high frequency of occurrence. If anything, a culture that holds honestly and integrity as high virtues is implicitly suggesting that they are abnormal.

If it was the expected outcome that everyone held to their word or kept punctual then they wouldn't be explicitly stated as measures of moral worth.

You continue to express an understanding of how common it is to fail to adhere to a schedule while still expecting the inverse; you are being idealistic no matter how enthusiastically you try to qualify it or attempt to misdirect the issue to my moral integrity.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well this is a deep and interesting turn of events

i think this debate would be easier to follow with examples, it seems very vague and generalized to certain events in a person's life with a very broad definition explaining why one is cynical and whether or not its realistic...

Is Zara trying to say that its not realistic to expect every single person to follow traits of trustworthiness and that its realistic to accept hit or miss with anyone rather than being cynical always?

Or perhaps Ive missed the mark entirely...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>people regularly fail to live up to promises, and scheduled events
>expecting people to live up to promises and scheduled events.

That is the very definition of unrealistic, your expectations were unrealistic from the outset even if you didn't have the experience to inform you of that fact beforehand.

From my point of view, expecting people to not live up to their promises or make it to schedules is the cynical view unless they have a history of such.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well this is a deep and interesting turn of events

i think this debate would be easier to follow with examples, it seems very vague and generalized to certain events in a person's life with a very broad definition explaining why one is cynical and whether or not its realistic...

Is Zara trying to say that its not realistic to expect every single person to follow traits of trustworthiness and that its realistic to accept hit or miss with anyone rather than being cynical always?

Or perhaps Ive missed the mark entirely...

Zara is expressing that virtues are held as virtues primarily because of their relatively low frequency of occurrence.

They represent ideals that humans should strive for primarily because they don't represent what humans on aggregate actually do.

From my point of view, expecting people to not live up to their promises or make it to schedules is the cynical view unless they have a history of such.

Consider for a moment that you probably hold these qualities as normative because you wisely avoid maintaining relationships and contact with people who fail to live up to them. I would hope that your friends would keep their commitments regularly, at least to you if not everyone they associate with.

Then consider all of the people you either willfully or passively avoid association with and entertain the idea that a lot of that has to do with the fact that a minority of them fall into the category of people who have betrayed your trust and the rest fall into the category of people who have never made a meaningful commitment to you in the first place by which you can judge their worthiness as associates.

Yes, I know that we will not always form bonds with all virtuous and trustworthy people, even those in our immediate vicinity, that is inconsequential to the larger point. Which is that you probably trust strangers significantly less than you do people with proofing either with yourself or inside your social circles because you are aware of the frequency at which unofficial contract is breached.

There is a reason that those inexperienced in the more negative behaviors of humanity are portrayed as sheltered and naive.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Zara is expressing that virtues are held as virtues primarily because of their relatively low frequency of occurrence.

They represent ideals that humans should strive for primarily because they don't represent what humans on aggregate actually do.

Consider for a moment that you probably hold these qualities as normative because you wisely avoid maintaining relationships and contact with people who fail to live up to them. I would hope that your friends would keep their commitments regularly, at least to you if not everyone they associate with.
Then consider all of the people you either willfully or passively avoid association with and entertain the idea that a lot of that has to do with the fact that a minority of them fall into the category of people who have betrayed your trust and the rest fall into the category of people who have never made a meaningful commitment to you in the first place by which you can judge their worthiness as associates.

Yes, I know that we will not always form bonds with all virtuous and trustworthy people, even those in our immediate vicinity, that is inconsequential to the larger point. Which is that you probably trust strangers significantly less than you do people with proofing either with yourself or inside your social circles because you are aware of the frequency at which unofficial contract is breached.

There is a reason that those inexperienced in the more negative behaviors of humanity are portrayed as sheltered and naive.

+1 for third persn speak

Okay so what youre saying is people are inherently bad, dissapointing, and letdowns so a virtue is what stives to deviate from this norm of human nature?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

+1 for third persn speak

Okay so what youre saying is people are inherently bad, dissapointing, and letdowns so a virtue is what stives to deviate from this norm of human nature?

All of those qualifiers are moral descriptions that I prefer to avoid using because they lack objective value.

I can only see someone as "bad" if their actions are inconsistent with my expectations and values.

I can only see someone as "disappointing" or a "letdown" if I set standards for them which they fail to live up to.

I don't always live up to my goal of expecting nothing from others before I can build a well of experience to draw conclusions about their behavior from, but I think I'm more qualified to call myself a realist than most if only because my expectations are less frequently founded upon prescriptions for ideal behavior.

Edit: I think virtues are reflective of qualities that individuals desire other people to emulate, if not for some collective benefit, at least for the benefit of the individual.

Edited by Zaraphayx
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Zara is expressing that virtues are held as virtues primarily because of their relatively low frequency of occurrence.

They represent ideals that humans should strive for primarily because they don't represent what humans on aggregate actually do.

Consider for a moment that you probably hold these qualities as normative because you wisely avoid maintaining relationships and contact with people who fail to live up to them. I would hope that your friends would keep their commitments regularly, at least to you if not everyone they associate with.
Then consider all of the people you either willfully or passively avoid association with and entertain the idea that a lot of that has to do with the fact that a minority of them fall into the category of people who have betrayed your trust and the rest fall into the category of people who have never made a meaningful commitment to you in the first place by which you can judge their worthiness as associates.

Yes, I know that we will not always form bonds with all virtuous and trustworthy people, even those in our immediate vicinity, that is inconsequential to the larger point. Which is that you probably trust strangers significantly less than you do people with proofing either with yourself or inside your social circles because you are aware of the frequency at which unofficial contract is breached.

There is a reason that those inexperienced in the more negative behaviors of humanity are portrayed as sheltered and naive.

Damn that's well-said, I have to agree. I wish I had the energy and motivation to effortpost as much as you do sometimes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...