Are All Problems Solveable and obstacles surmountable?

Post Reply New Topic

I will add this to it a bit. You could get the position, everything works fine for x period of time, new management comes in and all of a sudden you could be out on your ear because new management doesn't like you or you say something inadvertently wrong.

Better yet, one is told one thing when he goes to school and college and all of a sudden conditions like economics and culture changes therefore the goal posts are shifted. This means any move I make has the potential to lead me to failure and not only failure but failure to my detriment. Think about the Cube movie series as a metaphor. Yet, we're being asked to play in this twisted and vicious game which is unpredictable as the wind and any move today that leads to some success today leads to a detriment tomorrow.

How does one win in such a game? Be the better and smarter rat than everyone else in this game especially when everyone tries to outdo everyone in a competition? So, why play? Why try? Why struggle? What if one doesn't have any desire to compete and be competitive and society requires one to do exactly that? Then what? What if one desires and wants to forfeit and leave Hotel California? Is it true that one can check out but never really leave?

Well, I choose to take a more positive outlook than you Cubedemon.

Bad things, they happen. Being autistic, maybe it's a huge setback, but it's not the only big setback. There are a lot of people who have huge obstacle to overcome...and they can sit back and say, "It's too big of obstacle and it's not fair that I have this problem, so I'm not going anything" or they can "take the bull by the horns" as they say, and tackle the problem. And if they do the first one, it's their life to do it, ok.

I return to driving example. So with your logic you say "I don't know how to change lanes, and the chances of me learning are slim, so I'm not going to do anything". You keep driving dangerously. Then you have since found out that there was an easy fix. Did you take it? No, of course not, because you have this ridiculous logic. See, if this were me, or someone with more of a "take the bull by the horns" attitude, I would not need someone else to hand it to me, I would GO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT MYSELF. In this case, that would have been better, yes? Because then you would not have been so dangerous driver, and slso probably save money from your legal fees.

You'll never convince me that doing nothing and waiting for everyone else to hand you stuff is a good way to go. If I did this, I would not be living in Canada. There are many examples of why this wouldn't work for me. But again, hey it's your life, right?

I have already heard this can do, take charge of your life, pull yourself by your bootstraps lecture before. This says nothing and tells me nothing. Here is my response. Not everyone can take the bull by the horns. Some people do end up failing to their detriment. What is the outcome to this exactly? This is fact and this is truth right here. We do not look at the other side of the equation. Only one side is presented and that is those who find success. What happens to those who can't take the bull by the horns? This side is never presented at all.



I never said this at all. You're putting words in my mouth. What I said about my driving example is this. What I said was I went and discussed my driving issues with other people and told them I could not because of x, y and z so what am I doing wrong? They didn't attempt to show me where I was wrong. All they kept doing was kept trying to change my emotional state instead of discussing the problem at hand and explaining what I needed to do.

You state I lacked initiative. I have to dispute this claim. If I lacked initiative, then would I have asked anyone at all? If this does not demonstrate initiative then I literally do not grasp nor have a fundamental understand as to what showing initiative even means or what is considered showing initiative and why.



No, I actually obtained my answer a long time ago. In fact, I had to go to driving school as I stated in the post I wrote. The issue is already fixed. The instructor did not attempt to change people's attitude or try to get into people's emotional states. He gave instructional content to the matter at hand. He explained the point system of my state, explained the pertinent laws to us and went into detail as to the step by step instructions as to how to change lanes. Before then, I avoided expressways like the plague.

You said I could easily look this up on youtube. One problem. Until you mentioned it, it never occurred to me that I could have easily have looked it up on youtube or looked it up on the internet. In fact, I never would have thought the library may have had this answer. For me, it was an unknown, known. I would have looked that stuff up myself had I known. One can't google something or look up something if the thought never occurred. Have you ever had a problem in which the solution was so obvious yet one didn't think of it? I should have thought of it. Yet, I didn't. I have had this happen to me in other cases. Next appointment with my medical doctor I'm going to ask about this.



I actually was able to finally obtain my answer. Again, I don't understand how you drew out the conclusions you came to in my driving example and why you're conflating it with the maxim.

Now, I have to ask. Why are you putting words into my mouth that I never said whatsoever? Why are you conflating the maxim of "Nothing in Life is Guaranteed?"

Let's look at this in set theory terms. Imagine, we have all of the things that are possible to be guaranteed and the maxim says "Nothing in life is Guaranteed." Let's assume this maxim can be assigned a truth value of true or false.

We have:

a. It is true that "Nothing in life is Guaranteed." <<<<This isn't guaranteed.
b. It is false that "Nothing in life is Guaranteed." <<<This isn't guaranteed.

This means, if we must accept this maxim as truth then by the logic inherent to it we must accept it as false well since the maxim itself is included in the set of all things guaranteable.

If we must accept the maxim as truth then I have to ask, how is plausibility guaranteed as well? How can one truthfully guarantee plausibility as truth. Some people are making the claim that one will have greater success if one does something rather than do nothing. If plausibility and chance are a part of things that are guaranteed then how is plausibility and chance guaranteed either and how is the formula Do something > Do Nothing. Let's look at the converse of this formula which is Do Nothing > Do something. How is this formula and the negation of the formula not guaranteed either. Let's say I have a greater chance of doing nothing then doing something. This is not guaranteed but why isn't the negation guaranteed either based upon the logic of the maxim?



In my case, it was an unknown, unknown so yes, I did need someone to hand it to me and explain it to me. Before you said anything I could not.



Again, Unknown Unknown so how was I to take charge without asking others? I literally could not do it without the legal fees. The point was, it wasn't my attitude or lack of initiative. It was my lack of knowledge and ignorance that I didn't know how to rectify at the time and I didn't know where to turn. So, yes, I did need others to provide said data or provide where to obtain said data.



Well, Nothing in life is guaranteed. Is this maxim true, yes or no?



What is the extent of the control of our lives? Can you prove logically and empirically that anyone and everyone can overcome any and all obstacles thrown at them. Can you prove the philosophy of the internal locus of control and that we have complete control of our lives when a. when one has to follow 1000s of laws at least in my society, b. there will be things that will always be unknown to you, c. others have complete control of their lives, d. one has to follow a bunch of whole number of social standards in a social veneer in given society no matter where he or she goes. e. One is tied down through laws of time and space and whatever one chooses to do one has to follow the laws of time and space. f. One's mindset is based upon his nature and nurture.

What exactly is our limit? What is the extent of what I and others can do? What is the extent of my choices? What is the extent of the summit of my knowledge of all possible choices that I have in all possible given situations?

If Socrates is correct and evil comes from ignorance then is it not ignorance that holds some people back instead of lack of initiative, personal responsibility, etc? If some people have a certain mind state such as myself then I have to ask how is it not ignorance of what is truth and reality that is my problem and other people's problem? If one doesn't even realize he knows not of something to which he is suppose to know then how can one take the initiative to become aware to something he doesn't he conceive that one should research and be aware of? How does this ideology of the internal locus of control that you seem to logically accept as truth hold up in all cases?

If my mind is delusional and my mind is sick and let's assume that it is then how can I truthfully grab the bull by it's horns? How would that be logically possible at all? If my mind is compromised then how can I use my own thinking which is based in ignorance to develop sound thinking? How do I read and interpret things in the way they're meant to be read and interpreted, grab the bull by the horns correctly, if my mind is delusional. Even if my argument is fallacious in nature, then one has to question my mind right. If I'm delusional and insane, then how is it logically possible to use my insane mind and my delusional mind to develop the thinking I should have and who is the determiner of what this thinking should be and why?

Let's look at this argument right here.

A. All squares are penguins.
B. All penguins are animals.

Conclusion: All squares are animals.

This argument would be considered valid and unsound. It is valid because I can entail the conclusion from the premises meaning I can go from A-B-C. It is unsound because one of the premises is false. My reasoning could be valid and if a delusion in my mind causes me to entail unsound conclusions then how can I truthfully take the bull by its' horns? How do I do this, WelcomeToHolland if I have delusional and insane thinking?

By the way, what is your answer to Sweetleaf's post?

all obstacles are surmountable up to the endpoint where an immovable object encounters an irresistible force. what happens then?

Then a massive explosion occurs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2eqNB6zy9k

B9, the underlying belief that those like WelcomeToHolland have and share is that one can always control his own destiny and one is the captain of his own ship. It is why she reacts the way she reacts. The idea is what is called personal responsibility. No matter what the outcome is it is you who caused the outcome no matter the circumstances. Nothing but you is responsible for one's success or failure except for you, the individual.

Second, these people that I have spoken to and experience tell me that one has complete control over his life and one has to believe this. If one really did have complete control over his life then by logic no unforeseen obstacles could occur. One should be able to think of all possibilities of what one could do in a given decisional moment and then think of all outcomes both positive and negative. I know of no one including myself who has this inherent ability. Without this ability, I do not grasp how the idea of personality responsibility and this complete control of our lives is possible in all situations, contexts and subsets.

Third, if failures do happen due to unforeseen outcomes then by logic any number of these failures could be the type that is detrimental.

Fourth,If life isn't fair and can't be made fair which means unforeseen outcomes with detrimental failures can and do happen then by logic one can never be in complete control of his life, the internal locus of control is falsified in some subsets and contexts and personal responsibility has to be somewhat falsified as well.

Fifth, If Nothing in life is guaranteed and can't be guaranteed then by logic again at different moments of time the maxim that life isn't fair can't be guaranteed as well. This means at times, life is fair.

Conclusion: WelcomeToHolland's belief system is filled with inconsistencies, contradictions and beliefs that are not made based upon logic or science but through a form of a civil type religion based upon Robert Bellah's logical reasoning of what a civil religion is. This is a part of America's civil religion which she has pretty much adopted since moving to Canada. I do believe Canada has heavy American influence. She like a number of people are in love with the idea of grabbing the bull by its' horns and pulling one by its' bootstraps. She is in love with the idea of personal responsibility and the Yankee Can-Do mentality. She, from Holland, has adopted the American can-do attitude itself like others have not whether if it is always based upon sound reasoning but to belong in the civil church and to fit into the societal construct and narrative for acceptance by her peers. Based upon what the moral foundation theories of Jonathan Heidt, one doesn't use logic to get to a fundamental truth but uses logic to defend what he loves and cherishes and that is his or her beliefs whether they hold up or not.

I don't think people have complete control, I think people have some control.

My response to Sweetleaf was about bad things happening in the previous post.

I'm not in a good enough mood to reply to anything else (due to the s**t going on in my life right now, which is not entirely in my control, but with which I have choices to make about how to handle it).

Try this! Try listening to Whale songs and see if they relax you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=savCAd6RyPI

I like whale songs myself---but they cost money. And you need a job to get the money to buy those CD's.

Let's go back to my original question. Are all problems solvable and are all obstacles surmountable (and I will add) that are thrown at you and not to out there and outlandish?

If failure is a part of life, one will encounter unknowns and problems will any of them be problems that are to one's detriment? I don't mean catching a disease like Ebola or drowning. I can make what I think are the best moves to make and what is considered the most responsible moves and I can and others around me can still fail to our detriment.

The American Dream promotes only those who won in the end. What happens to those who lose and who sink in this society? What are the actual consequences to failure in the USA? Can anyone and everyone who believe they can and set their mind to it really can do so overall? Again, what is the extent to this can-do attitude that one is required to have?

If one truthfully can't guarantee anything, at least explain what this entails to graduating seniors of both high school and college and let's at least have Truth in Advertising when it comes to the American Dream which is one can bust his ass and one can never truthfully achieve success and the American Dream whatsoever. Can we at least quit promoting a slanted view of what the American Dream is, what it entails to succeed in it and not everyone will achieve it no matter how hard they work or bust their ass? I would be very happy with Truth in Advertising if nothing else.

My opinion, let's cut the nonsense already.

Hey man: it's not nice calling what I say "nonsense." I have an opinion. You have an opinion. We might not agree.

But I don't think your viewpoint is "nonsense." I just don't believe in your viewpoint in this case.

Yes, obviously not all problems are solveable, and obstacles surmountable. But what's the use in living if we don't try to solve difficult problems, and scale seemingly insurmountable walls?

Frankly, If I didn't have the opportunity to do the above, I'd be really, really depressed.

I apologize my friend.

Apology accepted, sir.

By the way, I love your avatar.

I am going to paraphrase a sermon from my pastor that was given a long time ago. There was a young lady who was on drugs living in a motel with an abusive boyfriend. This is what the pastor said. It was her mindset, her thinking based upon her upbringing that brought her to that situation in the first place. Her choices were based upon her mindset and her upbringing. She knew know better and could not conceive of anything else beyond her own mindset.

What he said was very profound in my opinion and it was in the form of a question. What he asked was how can she use that same mindset that got her in her situation in the first place to get herself out of the situation. There is a method to all of the madness to this whole thread. I presume that you're a personal responsibility advocate and I am glad I have your attention WelcomeToHolland.

You have seen that my mind is delusional somewhere and I will accept that I am under some kind of delusion. Now that being said here is my question to you and others who say to do it ourselves, grab the pull by its horns, take responsibility for your own life and pull yourself by one's bootstraps. If my mind is delusional and let's assume for the sake of argument that it is then how can I use my own delusional thinking and mind to get a rational and sound mind on my own without the community assistance and guidance. How can I be expected with a delusional and irrational mind be expected to come up with certain concepts and how can I look on youtube and other resource material to make sure I'm interpreting the material in the way I'm supposed to if my mind is delusional on my own?

My question is on behalf of the autism community and others who need assistance as well is how can we be expected to grab the bull by its horns if our very mindset and neurology got us into our situations in the first place and how can we be expected to use this very mindset to get ourselves out without help and assistance provided by society at large?

You say take the bull by its horns. How do we do this exactly?

This really bothered me. You clearly don't know anything about me, what I think, or what I've been through. I'm not from Holland.

There's nothing uniquely American about taking the bull by the horns at all.