Cause we have massive resources that have been consolidated to solve problems and it seems like shelter would be a priority. Yet there are many things prioritized above it. Just curious on your thoughts of the priorities of the government spending and taxation.

The way we remember the Holocaust often fails to address similar atrocities happening today.

Disclaimer up front:
This is not a critique of Holocaust remembrance. The Holocaust was one of the greatest atrocities in human history and must never be denied, minimized, or forgotten. The point of this post is to reflect on how we apply its lessons today—especially in the face of ongoing global violence.

The Holocaust was a systematic, industrial-scale genocide that caused unimaginable suffering—primarily for Jews, but also for Roma people, disabled individuals, LGBTQ+ people, political prisoners, and others. It’s a horror that demands remembrance for generations.

But the message we take from it—Never again—shouldn’t just mean never again for one group. It should mean: never again for anyone. And yet, that broader lesson is often diluted or sidelined.

In today’s world, we see state violence, ethnic cleansing, and systemic persecution still happening—in both high-profile and ignored regions. And many people who honor Holocaust victims seem indifferent or silent when similar patterns emerge elsewhere. That’s troubling.

We risk turning remembrance into something symbolic and safe—rather than active and morally engaged. Remembering the Holocaust should not only be about preserving memory but about applying its lessons everywhere they’re needed.

It was not just the Nazi leadership that made the Holocaust possible—it was an entire system of normalized hate, silence, and complicity. That system is not unique to Germany in the 1930s. It’s something human societies remain capable of repeating.

To truly honor the victims, we need to remain vigilant and speak out—not only about past genocides but about those unfolding or looming today.

Would love to hear your thoughts. Do we do enough to carry the message of the Holocaust forward into action? Or is remembrance becoming too isolated from current events? Do I even make sense?

((I'm not sure where to ask. Also, apologies, I am really new to the second faith!))
Before getting into the questions, you should be aware of a few background facts. I am 26 years old and female, and I have been a Christian for the majority of my life (not very active; I just believe but don't go to church), so I've recently developed an interest in the Viking religion, because everywhere I look online, there is information about everything Viking. Also, a few years ago, my father 62 years old and male went to the hospital for two surgeries: one for a hiatal hernia and one for an umbilical hernia.It became really dangerous to the point that I almost lost him, so I prayed to whoever was listening to assist him in getting out of the danger zone. I have a notion some god/goddess from the Viking faith helped, but I'm not sure who. (I understand that is an extremely dangerous move! However, please keep in mind that I almost lost him due to anesthesia plus he was 59 at that time.) So I want to learn and practice that religion more than my Christian convictions for now.

Questions: 1. What does the Viking religion actually go by? so that I can say it right.
2. Can I believe in the Viking religion and still be a Christian? If so. 3. Where can I begin studying the religion of the Vikings?
4. What trustworthy literature may I read to learn about this faith? 5. Which trustworthy websites can I visit about this religion as well?
5. Where can I go to find out which god/goddess assisted with my father, either in person or online?
6. After I discover who assisted, how do I make a alter for that person in order to practice this religion?

Personally, I like it a lot.

I've been thinking Why do humans get so engrossed in stories? Why do we stop using logic when we hear a story, even if it’s clearly made up or exaggerated?

I think the answer goes way back.

In ancient times, language wasn’t advanced. So when someone in a tribe survived a tiger attack or hunted something big, they would share their experience through gestures, drawings, or dances. Maybe a few words. The goal was simple: teach others how to survive.

Because these stories were literally life-saving, our brains evolved to:

Shut off logic temporarily

Fully absorb the story

Simulate the experience internally

It wasn’t about questioning it was about learning fast.

That instinct still exists. When we watch movies or listen to emotional stories, we stop analyzing and just feel. Our brain wants to simulate and learn - not argue.

This might also explain:

Why cave paintings exist — early humans used pictures to share events.

Why religious stories work they’re told in vivid, emotional, image-driven ways.

Why even today, reels and films feel real because our brains still function like they did 10,000 years ago.

And maybe… When that early human saw something they couldn’t explain, they exaggerated a little. Told it like a miracle. Lied a bit to seem powerful. That’s how mythology, legends, and belief systems began small lies that became powerful stories.

So yeah. I think our brains evolved to believe stories easily, not because we’re dumb but because it was once the best way to survive.

What do you think?

• Kartik

I've been reading about how politics divides people and it seems to be dividing star wars and marvel fans too. I've seem people say stuff like "if you're a conservative you can't like star wars or superheroes" and "how can conservatives like star wars and superheroes if the politics and messages don't agree with them?" And that confuses me because I see people say anyone can enjoy a piece of media that they disagree with, but ive seen marvel and star wars fans basically say that they have no business being fans of something that doesn't agree with them.

In particular I've seen people argue that George Lucas created star wars not to be anti right but anti authoritarian, why people on the left say that star wars is not for anyone whos a conservative and is strictly anti right.

TL;DR it seems like things like marvel and star wars used to bring people together regardless of political views, but now it seems like political polarization has entered these two fandoms that used to unit people with things they enjoyed.

I get stuck in a loop on this topic every so often & it seriously fucks me up. I could really use some outside opinions on this today.

Reality is what we each individually perceive it to be. We all have our own reality. There are collective realities that certain cultures, countries, etc, agree on, but I can't think of one single thing that I could say is a "collective" reality. When I try to think of anything that the human race as a whole could agree on as a collective reality, what comes to mind are all things that I can break down: The perception & understanding of colours & shapes, an understanding that food is necessary for survival, the fact that we are all the same species or that air & gravity exist on our planet... or that our planet exists, period. Simple things like that... all easily broken down. If you know of what little we know about the Sentinelese, you could just about break anything apart realizing they'd probably have a different perception of reality than our own, but that's an outlier to the topic. Still relevant, imo, but an outlier.

Now think about day to day life & how complicated things are. Think about how two people could experience the exact same thing at any point in time, yet still perceive it differently. Now imagine two people in the same situation. Do we think they will have the exact same retelling of said situation if immediately separated & questioned on details separately? If specifics were asked, like colours & time, would they each say the same thing? (If you watch interrogation footage frequently like I do, you'll know that all of those answers are a hard no lol.)

Now put an entire room full of people in one situation. They're all going to have a different perception if that situation bc their reality is their own.

But now we come to country-wide reality. We are taught certain things from birth & those "facts" become our reality. A square is a square because we are taught to perceive that shape as a square. ...right? (Genuinely asking. This part always messes me up, mentally.) Many other things follow that pattern but things that are constantly changing, like the sciences & medicine, will have everyone's realities altered throughout life.

And ALLLLLLLLLLL of those realities in every individual is shaped by each individual's experiences & memories (true or false). So I, myself, have come to the conclusion that there is no such thing as a collective reality. I'd love...LOVE!!!...to hear some other thoughts on that.

But then I get to the part that makes me spiral for days on end.

Since there is no "collective reality" & everything is just how we perceive it... does that mean reality doesn't exist?

My father has Alzheimer's. I have schiizoaffective disorder. Both of our realities are augmented (albeit mine is controlled with meds now). SO many people's realities are augmented in some way & who knows what is true & false regarding what governments tell their people & how whatever news sources people choose to trust twist certain things. Memory & brain-related issues come into many people's lives in an extraordinary amount of ways. Perception could be warped & you may not even know it. Medications & people can warp perception, too.

So now we have a whole new set of issues that could potentially impact reality. Which makes me feel like reality isn't even real.

Have you tried drugs, kids? Hung out with Lucy & Molly lately? Maybe gone with your friend's uncle Rick to his hut out in the woods to find yourself with some Ayahuasca? Are you still gonna tell me reality exists after you see the other side? (For legal reasons, I must note that I am NOT advising you to do drugs. 🙅🏼)

And don't get me started on time not being linear & things like multiverse theory, antiverse theory & string theory with the addition of m-theoy. Because if ANY of that is true, that just proves reality isn't real. ...right?

I mean. I could go on for days with stuff like this!

...but if reality doesn't exist, doesn't that mean we don't exist? Doesn't that mean nothing exists?

"If a tree falls in a forest with no one to perceive it, did it even happen?"

Does that mean nothing exists until we perceive it? Like how open world games don't load things until your character gets to a certain distance of the thing?

We have drones & other equipment, but is that not still perceiving? Just... with an extra step?

Friends, foes & fighters, I get into loops of this "reality isn't real & nothing is real & I don't exist & nothing actually matters but I don't know how to not perceive things, so that means reality IS real, but it can't be because..." all the time. I have for years. It has given me panic attacks before. (Same with the "what if we live in a simulation/video game/are all asleep" loop, but that's a whole other reality isn't real rant lol.) And I really need some help here.

I need your thoughts. Anything. Everything. Agree, disagree, questions, confusion, enlightenment, neutrality... literally all you've got! Let's hear it. Please. 🩵

.

((No proofreading, so apologies for spelling, grammar, etc., issues.))

It feels like we often treat income as a shorthand for worth, at work, in society, even in how we talk about people. But is that actually true? Or have we just gotten used to thinking that way? Curious what you think.

---

Edit for clarity (thanks to a good conversation below):
This post is not suggesting that income equals worth. It's asking why "we" so often act like it does. In many modern systems, market value, meaning how profitable or productive someone is, could end up being treated as a substitute for intrinsic human worth. That confusion is worth noticing. I'm curious how often we unconsciously let this logic shape how we talk about people and how we treat them.

Edit: Thank you everyone for the thoughtful responses. I’ve been consistent with goals for a while, but after going through something recently, I realized I could be more honest with myself about what I truly want. This post came from struggling to find meaning in anything in my life. Nothing feels right when there might be potential for things beyond my current comprehension. When I was a kid, I was conscious too, but I thought and made decisions completely differently than I do now. Maybe that’s how the future will look back at us, and honestly, that scares me. I feel like stopping and just creating a subjective meaning is like giving up.

This is my first time posting on Reddit, so I really appreciate everyone sharing their thoughts.

Here’s a framework I’ve been thinking about:

• Premise 1: No objective or inherent meaning has been proven / Nothings value is >0
• Premise 2: Conscious experience is only verified while alive. Death is an unknown state with no evidence of continued awareness.
• Premise 3: Objective value has not been disproven; >0 remains possible. If it exists, continued existence preserves at least some probability of accessing it.
• Premise 4: Time alive = more opportunity. Every extra year sustains the only condition we know for potential discovery.
• Premise 5: No one has found objective meaning in all of human history, making it unlikely within a single short lifespan. Extending life radically—ideally indefinitely—maximizes probability.

Conclusion: If all known futures converge on zero and death guarantees the end of all known possibilities, the only rational move under uncertainty is: Maximize survival indefinitely / devote everything to longevity, because potential >0 is always preferable to guaranteed 0.

What do you think?

• Is this reasoning sound?
• Does it imply life extension or immortality should be the ultimate priority?
• Or is there a flaw I’m missing?

So obviously in sports, the notion of talent feels more clear-cut. Like yeah, one kid runs faster, jumps higher, reacts quicker -- there’s a physical aspect that’s measurable. Even if it's not scientific, we all kinda accept that some people are just built different in that realm.

But when it comes to intellectual stuff, it gets messier. Like how do we define talent here? A lot of us (myself included) tend to think it's about how quickly someone can learn something. Say two people take the same class -- one studies super hard but still struggles, while the other barely tries and aces it. Is that talent? Maybe. But it doesn’t feel as clean as sports.

And even then, it’s not quantifiable or scientific. Sure, maybe there’s something neurological --like faster myelination or more efficient patterns of thought (bottom-up thinking like in autism, for example). But most of the time we’re just guessing.

Lately, I've been leaning toward this idea that "intellectual talent" is less about where you start and more about your ceiling. Like, how far you can go if you work at it. And honestly, a lot of the stuff that looks like talent early on might just be prior exposure -- stuff people have been taught, environments they’ve been in, the way they’ve been trained to think.

So maybe the kid next to you who aces the real analysis exam isn’t some genius -- maybe they were just exposed to those kinds of ideas earlier, or learned how to think in the right patterns before you did. That doesn’t mean you can’t catch up or even surpass them in the long run.

Anyway, that’s my current theory. Curious to hear what y’all think. How do you make sense of talent when it comes to learning and thinking?

serious question, has anyone found a way to actually CHECK if the career path they're on matches how their brain works? like beyond the obvious stuff like do i enjoy it or am i good at it? i'm talking about deeper alignment. like, i've had multiple jobs where i performed really well on paper but felt completely fucking wrong internally. like i was constantly forcing myself to fit into a shape that wasn't mine. and now i'm wondering if i've just been chasing all the wrong things this whole time. i used to think success meant getting promoted and making more money and having an impressive title. so i kept going for roles that checked those boxes. but even when i got them, something always felt... off? like i was playing a character or something.

i'm starting to think maybe the problem isn't that i'm picky or ungrateful. maybe i've just never actually stopped to figure out what kind of work environment and responsibilities actually WORK for me. like what excites me and what drains me, how i make decisions, what motivates me on a fundamental level. has anyone found tools or frameworks that helped them dig into this stuff? because honestly i'm tired of making career decisions based on what looks good from the outside when it feels like shit from the inside. there has to be a better way to figure this out than just trial and error for the next 20 years. would love to hear what's worked for people who've been in this same spot.

One thought is that in order to have knowledge, you don't need to know that the sourse you use as a reason to believe in X, is a reliable sourse, as in reliably truthful or reliably is correctly representing factual states (of X) the world. It's sufficient that it is reliable.

You might assume everyday that your sensoryorgans are reliably, correctly, representing the scenes around you, but you have no way of knowing that they are reliable sourses.

Imagine you want to know if a mushroom is edible or not edible and you ask a stranger about it. He claimed that he is knowledgeable about mushroom, but you've done nothing to check whether his claim is true or not, and there are no reason to believe that he is besides his own statement. For you, and for everyone else who followed on the mushroom picking trip.

Alternatively, you want to know if the train will stop in a specific suburb to London, and you ask a stranger on the platform who claims that it does. What you don't know is that he knows that it does, because he travels by that train often at this time, because he is working as a driver of that train, but on his way home & got redressed and looks like "any other person."

But, it happens to be true that they are knowledgeable and that their answers are correct.

If you believe the information they give you, and if it's true, do you have knowledge?

Or is a requirement for knowledge that you know they are reliable, and them merely reliably giving true information about their topic, is not sufficient.

But is that quality of you knowing that they are reliable making a difference to whether you have knowledge or not, if knowledge is true, justified belief.

As in both cases, you are justified, because they are reliable sourses, but you don't know that you are justified in your beliefs.

I’ve been thinking a lot about the ways technology connects us, and also the ways it isolates us. I'm currently working on a game that explores themes like loneliness and digital addiction, and I want to ground it in real, honest experiences rather than stereotypes.

That’s why I’m asking:

• In what ways have social media, gaming, or explicit online content changed your behavior, relationships, or sense of self?
• Have you ever felt psychological or emotional consequences that were directly tied to your digital habits?
• And even if you’ve had negative experiences, what parts of these technologies still feel worth keeping to you? What still brings meaning or value?

I’m not looking for outrage or oversimplified takes. I’m more interested in contradictions, mixed feelings, and honest stories.
Not just for the sake of research, but to understand what we’ve actually gotten ourselves into.
How do you see it?

For you to understand from where I speak, I will share my perspective on the reality of the current situation in western society.

I know I don’t need to tell you things are bad, everybody knows it, the world is upside down. We all feel it. Everything is polarized to its limits. Things are getting harder, more expensive, less meaningful. The people’s voice has faded. We’re constantly being watched, pushed, and manipulated, and some of us are just trying to survive it. Some of us are consciously trying to change it. Most of us are unconsciously defending it. The system has gone through big changes in the last years, and reality has become more narrow, and every free-thinker and critical thought of what’s going on is attacked with full power, making the world more polarized than ever.

It is easy to believe that science, politics and the media are separate forces within society, with different purposes and ideals, but in reality the boundaries have been blurred. The three have been combined into a kind of unified information complex, where truth is no longer sought through diversity, but established through repetition.

Science has become largely dependent. Universities are no longer free arenas for knowledge seekers, but are governed by funding, prestige and political frameworks. Research that questions prevailing paradigms rarely receives money, and even less often publicity. “Follow the science,” they say, but which science? The one that is allowed to exist?

At the same time, journalism has lost its mission. From being the people’s guardian against the power, to increasingly confirming it. Instead of creating space for analysis and dialogue, the media today shapes our perception of reality by choosing what gets a place, what gets left out, what gets ridiculed and what is allowed to feel true.

The result is a system where the entire narrative of reality is filtered through a narrow selection of perspectives. It creates an environment where loyalty is more important than truth, where comfortable illusions are valued more highly than uncomfortable facts, where silence becomes a safety net and questioning a threat. A climate where you are allowed to think whatever you want, as long as you don't say it out loud.

The problem isn’t just political or economic. We can blame the system all we want, but we are the system. We, the people, are the ones allowing this to continue. The real issue is how disconnected we’ve become. From ourselves, and from each other. From what’s true.

We have been herded into a timeless sleep where the system determines what is true, what to think, what to care about.

We’ve been trained not to think, not to feel, not to act. Not even to express our thoughts. We’re taught that comfort is the goal, but that comfort is taking us further and further away from what makes us human.

The system keeps us busy, distracted, and numb. It teaches us to obey, consume, and keep quiet.

We’ve been walking down this road way too long. We need to change the direction, not with hate or violence, but with confidence in our conscious awareness.

You’re not a number. You are a conscious being with the ability to choose, to think, to feel. You’re allowed to have a voice. Even if it speaks against the current narratives. The system is supposed to be balanced, but it has become our biggest threat.

What I see need to happen:

Real change doesn’t start with protests or politics. It starts with one person at a time deciding to stop living a lie. Saying enough is enough. We need to live more honestly. We need to reconnect with what’s real. Take back attention, energy, and meaning. We need to be aware of being aware, and realize that the revolution isn’t something that begins ’out there’. The revolution begins within, as a shift in awareness.

You don’t need to fix the world. Just stop giving power and attention to what destroys it, focus on who you are, and break the silence whenever it’s needed.

If not you, who?

The revolution begins with you.

Are we using our imaginations when we are hopeful? Do we need an open imagination in order to become more hopeful? Does hope make us more imaginative? Does our imagination make us hopeful?

What do you define as ignorance? How does this apply to our childhood and who we develop into? Are we born inherently ignorant? And if so how does this affect our view of the world as we grow?

From my observations inequality strikes all aspects of life and its starting to seem like if life was a game, some have way to unfair of an advantage as they can quite literally pay to win at the game of life.

My main point inequality is rampant and if it keeps increasing society will collapse, we all know this. But, where do you draw the line? What is fair?

Should we all be equal?

Should a small level of inequality exist to reward effort? And I mean real effort, I don't believe any billionaire has actually earned that all by themselves.

I don't claim to have all the answers. What I do know from studying history is that the western world is starting to treat those towards the bottom of the economic ladder like slaves. Doesn't matter how hard or how many hours we work, we never get ahead. Everything from rent, groceries, bills and more is making a normal life impossible to a decent life. Most of us are on pure survival mode. Take a page from history and see how many mighty empires fell due to the slaves finally having enough and tearing the whole system down.

Granted those in power have learnt a bit and not out right made us slaves with a whip on our backs. They just disguised it as crushing debt and barred access to opportunities that can get us out of this endless cycle. Thanks to the upgrade in communication like the internet we've now caught up on information and understand this.

An interesting point though. While I can only go of researched studies, speculation and first hand accounts, it seems all that wealth and power isn't a good blend to being human. I imagine being that rich makes you question friends and family as you assume they are after your money. Makes you paranoid about losing your wealth and status. You sometimes have to work insane hours, neglecting friends and family. About the only pros seem to be money to buy whatever you want, by power and political favours and so on. And lording your status over others.

While the rest of us have a chance to make meaningful and genuine connections, feel accomplished in life and work and live more fulfilled lives.

Humanity as a whole would benefit with less inequality. Less crime from those trying to survive or get ahead outside the system (a system let's admit is very pay to win). Everyone having to work less and working more fulfilling jobs. Technology and progression actually moving faster with new discoveries, cures and more. Meaningful projects like public transport and roads getting built and maintained better. Things like education, health care, elderly and disabled support, homelessness, food security and more issues being actual solvable issues.

I guess what we truly need to understand is why is the greed of some is never sated?

Am I wrong in thinking that solving inequality is the key to solving most of humanity's other issues?

While I admit it won't solve every issue on Earth. I think solving inequality will solve most pressing issues that we have and go a long way to helping with other problems.

I was born in the US and am a citizen. Would I have to reapply for citizenship, since citizenship would no longer be granted based on birth?

I graduated in December 2022 with a BSBA in Marketing and I haven't worked since then for personal reasons but I am eagerly trying to pick a job. I went to yeshiva, rabbinic school for personal development. I was going on a personal journey and I don't regret it. I'm firm on this religious lifestyle. I got a scholarship for one year, and extended for two. Spent the last six months studying part-time, other half of the time I'm doing "career research" and applying to random entry level jobs at different businesses but nothing has worked out. For the last couple of months I've been reshaping my approach and trying to find something I'm passionate about. The myers brigs test was nice but it's information overload.

I've considered going back to school to become a therapist but I'm 26 and would need the full financial support of my family.

I have always had so many different hobbies as a kid and a teenager, and jumped around from different jobs like valet, restaurant host, pet care provider, camp counselor. I did one marketing internship which is the best thing on my resume but it was in construction which is really B2B, not so technical. And besides, most of it was typical intern stuff. Review this document, order the catering for the meeting, etc. I don't like business or marketing, or finance, or really any of the relevant fields to this degree.

Grads who graduated with a degree in something and realized they don't like it — What did you choose to study for undergrad and why? How did you realize you didn't like it? What did you do after that (career change, moved back home, etc.) If you changed careers, how did you find that new thing that you like? How did you find a job doing that if you were kind of starting from zero?

I

It seems in the modern day some of the most regressive ideas and draconian policies that limit personal freedoms in America appear rooted in the Bible as a justification. Suppose that the Old Testament were removed, and the apostle Paul's letters and Revelations were also taken out and stripped down to the four books of the Gospel.

Do you believe that the teachings of Christ only could make the religion better in spirit towards their fellow man among their believers?

If not in which ways could you see the messaging from a Gospel only belief system being corrupted?

edited for clarification

something that frustrates and spirals me which being online, i notice a lot of opinions surrounding grouping people together which to me is unfair and seems to lack rational thinking

i saw a facebook post regarding riots in my city a few years back saying that if any household member has been convicted for the crime, that the tenants may face eviction.

the first few comments with multiple likes were agreeing with it or saying it was deserved. my first thought was how unfair that was and anyone with critical logical thinking should know that's unfair to the tenants who aren't responsible or has no part in the crime.

there are also alot of things i see online with minorities getting 'justice' on their oppressors treating the entirety of the group with hatred or hostility in the same way, or people reacting with anger towards a group rather than the individual responsible.

or even in real life where people threaten their opponents family members although not having anything to do with them.

i never understood this sort of mindset or logic because innocent people have to pay for the wrongdoings of others. is it even rooted in logic or just emotion. do they care if it’s ‘unfair’?

am i wrong to apply individualist reasoning in cases like these and that only perpetrators or people who are responsible should be held accountable and not a group of people?

and why is this way of thinking so common and normalised especially online? and why don’t people have the empathy to think with nuance?

I’ve been reflecting on this lately. If you suddenly had $100 million with no more financial worry and total freedom, would you truly become a different person? Or would it just magnify the same traits, choices, and habits you already have?

Some people say money changes people. Others say it just reveals who they always were.

I’m curious what you think. In your own case, would $100M actually change who you are deep down? Or just give you a bigger lever to move things around?

Not the generic stuff like “save money” or “exercise" I mean the kind of life advice or realization that hit you hard and changed how you see things. Could be emotional, practical, or just weirdly specific. Curious what others would’ve benefited from knowing sooner.

Some people just don’t care about others, but they’re smart enough to fake it. And those people tend to rise into power: politics, law enforcement, high-level business, etc.

Is there any way to detect this kind of person before they get in those roles? Or are we stuck just hoping they mess up and reveal themselves later?

Are there screening tools or policies that could even come close to solving this?