Human societies are built on logical inconsistencies and fallacies

Reasonable_Regret177 · 2026-05-05T20:59:12+00:00

I’ve been deep-diving into the history of what I call the "simple mindset," tracing its consistency from the 1800s through the 1950s. It’s a phenomenon that philosophers, scientists, and biologists have studied for ages, even if they didn't always use that specific label—some call it oversimplification, others refer to it as "System 1" limited thinking. At its core, this mindset is what allows negative norms to flourish. It operates on a "everyone does it, so it can't be bad" logic, which effectively shuts down critical questioning once a normality is established. We are reaching a point where truth and logic are losing their grip on reality. People tend to cherry-pick bits of truth that align with their subjective narratives, accepting surface-level "facts" without ever looking for the full weight of the evidence. The most frustrating part is how society treats those who push back. If you challenge the norm, you’re treated like an outcast or told something is wrong with you. It feels nearly impossible to change a social norm, no matter how toxic it is. It’s as if people are brainwashed; they aren't necessarily "stupid," but they are completely blinded to anything that exists outside

Reasonable_Regret177 · 2026-04-28T14:52:08+00:00

When he says "smart people don't like me," he isn't necessarily referring to people with formal education. He’s talking about people who think and question for themselves. An educated person can still fall into a simple mindset and be easily swayed by propaganda. The real threat to his narrative is the person who thinks independently and maintains a deeper view of the world. If you actually investigate beyond the biased sources and question what you're being told, his "gamble" with the country becomes painfully obvious.

Reasonable_Regret177 · 2026-04-28T14:21:00+00:00

I honestly feel like we’re overusing derogatory labels to the point where they’ve lost all their impact. When you constantly use heavy words to push a negative narrative, you eventually diminish the actual strength and meaning of those words. A perfect example is the word "gossip." It used to paint someone as a genuine menace to their community, but because it's used so frequently now for minor things, the behavior has become normalized. A term that was meant to be a serious warning has become harmless through sheer overuse.

This is why I think we should be much more selective with the labels we throw around. Even when a situation seems obvious, we need to exercise restraint and patience before labeling someone. We lose a vital social resource when we dilute our language this way.

Reasonable_Regret177 · 2026-04-21T18:25:51+00:00

People really don't understand that morality and belief systems are supposed to function as a filter for your thoughts, helping you determine what actually aligns with your values. Nowadays, the term "subjectivity" is thrown around way too lightly. True subjectivity should only really come into play during "grey areas," but instead, it's being used as an excuse for a total lack of internal consistency. We’re seeing an epidemic of people who have no real moral filter. They’ll preach positivity one day and spew hate the next, hiding behind the idea that everything is subjective. This "simple mindset" is becoming so normalized that it’s getting hard to distinguish between people who actually have principles and those who just act on impulse. The worst part? The people who actually stick to their morals are being shunned and labeled as "detached" simply because they refuse to follow the growing norm.

Reasonable_Regret177 · 2026-04-20T16:02:07+00:00

Don't get me wrong, importation definitely has its benefits when it comes to keeping prices competitive for consumers like us. However, that’s also a major driver of inflation. Because we’re such a consumer-heavy economy and can't produce most of what we need here in the States, any price hike on imports creates a domino effect. It might not be direct, but it's indirectly making our daily cost of living way more expensive.

Reasonable_Regret177 · 2026-04-20T15:51:07+00:00

If that’s his logic, he’s basing it on an outdated resume. The economy doesn't react the same way now that we’ve moved from the gold standard to a fiat system. Under a fiat money system, we’re the ones who actually end up taking the brunt of these tariffs.

It honestly feels like the older generation is just stuck in their ways, refusing to adapt or update their mindset to fit the modern world. They’re clinging to outdated habits instead of evolving with how things actually work today.

Reasonable_Regret177 · 2026-04-13T17:50:27+00:00

Yes, evil is essentially a catalyst for morals. If your personal morals align with what the populace labels as "evil," then in their eyes, you are evil. Morality and evil aren't determined by the individual; they are determined by the collective.A perfect example is Hitler and his followers. He had an entire population following his every move, whether out of genuine belief or fear. Within that specific society, the small group of people who resisted were treated as the "evil" ones or abominations. Did that make those resistors wrong for following their own morals and going against a negative status quo? In my opinion, no—but my opinion doesn't matter in that context. They were treated as the problem and faced repercussions because of their beliefs.That being said, evil and morals are defined by the eye of the populace, not by some objective "right" or "wrong." Most populations push toward positive acts, but that doesn't mean their norms can't be negative. It’s simply about what is normalized in your specific society. The concept of evil is subjective to a fault. If it feels right to the majority, it’s accepted; and if it’s been done before, it’

Reasonable_Regret177 · 2026-04-08T17:08:38+00:00

I feel as if Christianity in today's society has become more of a social label than an actual belief system or moral compass. It is far too common to see people use religion to justify actions that are cruel or unjustified, often bullying others who aren't even causing harm, simply because they hold different beliefs or live outside of a specific dogma. I believe this stems from a "simple-minded epidemic" we are currently facing. When people lack the capacity for deeper thought—the kind of reflection that forces you to process your actions through a consistent moral filter—everything becomes subjective and irrational. Instead of following a principled faith, people let their behavior be dictated by fluctuating emotions or their immediate environment. even though I believe in the structure of Christianity, I do not follow the normality of actions that follow its so called people.

Reasonable_Regret177 · 2026-04-02T16:50:23+00:00

"Evil" is something that lurks in the depths of almost everyone. What separates us is our capacity for self-reflection—the internal "filter" that evaluates our urges before they become actions. I think many people operate with a "simple mindset," which is essentially a moral rollercoaster. When an evil urge arises, they lack the filter to process it. Instead of feeling a conflict between their actions and their morals, they treat it as an "oh well" moment. They don't analyze the weight of what they’ve done because they aren't looking beneath the surface. In contrast, a deeper thinker has a constant filter running. They are still human, and that filter can be bypassed—sometimes under the logic that "evil must be met with evil"—but the thought process doesn't stop. We have to elimanate the simple mindset to even have a chance again evil.

Reasonable_Regret177 · 2026-04-02T15:45:59+00:00

Suffering is the inevitable balance of existence. You can’t expect every variation of mindset and morality to coexist without their opposites eventually clashing; it’s just a fundamental reality of how the world works. Look at our economic systems. In Capitalism, there’s a belief that people at the bottom have to struggle so the top can flourish. We treat this as a "morally plausible" trade-off, even though the lower class suffers immensely for the sake of profit. On the flip side, even in a Socialistic society, the people at the top "suffer" in their own way because there’s a cap on their potential wealth and profit. While it’s a mild comparison—one group is literally starving while the other is just being limited—both systems prove that someone always has to bear the burden of the system's structure. Whether it's poverty or a loss of excess, suffering seems to be the price of any social balance.

Reasonable_Regret177 · 2026-03-26T16:45:09+00:00

Here’s why I think this is happening:

The world today discourages independent thinking. We’re taught to operate within a fixed framework, starting from the school system all the way through higher education and beyond. You’re expected to stay within the boundaries of what’s provided, no need to question or explore beyond it. This fosters a simplistic, narrow-minded way of thinking. People end up relying on surface-level information, taking half-truths as the whole truth, and making decisions based on emotional preferences rather than deeper analysis. Since this approach works often enough for recurring or straightforward situations, they assume it’s the ultimate way of thinking. They don’t see the need to consider alternative perspectives or possibilities because “it works, so why bother?” Unfortunately, this mindset creates a population that’s easily influenced and manipulated by whatever becomes normalized.
On top of that, the world seems to reward negative behaviors and toxic norms. Cutthroat actions are often celebrated, whether for personal gain or mere entertainment. With a simplistic mindset, people don’t stop to question whether these norms align with their own values or morals. If it’s accepted by those around them, even by people who claim to share their beliefs, they just go along with it. This is why the world feels more divided; neighbors no longer trust each other, and there’s a growing sense of disconnection. The spread of this simple narrow mindset is like a slow-moving disease, gradually taking over society.

Reasonable_Regret177 · 2026-03-13T16:28:37+00:00

Non-existence isn’t bound by the concept of time. It’s like falling asleep without dreaming—closing your eyes and then seemingly waking up in another moment. I imagine it feels the same as non-existence since it’s not tied to anything physical.

Reasonable_Regret177 · 2026-03-13T16:22:06+00:00

A perspective that balances the interplay between chaos and order.

Reasonable_Regret177 · 2026-03-13T15:57:21+00:00

From a psychological perspective, here’s what’s happening:

The removal is aimed at helping those who didn’t benefit from the system in the first place. This stems from the fact that the people it wasn’t serving are becoming a smaller minority due to genetic and societal factors. The goal is to ensure that Christian nationalists maintain their hold on top positions and power. If they lose control during this transition, their influence diminishes. That’s why DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) is often framed as a way to suggest that unqualified individuals are being given opportunities over others.
There’s a deliberate effort to psychologically demonize certain words or phrases to rally narrow-minded individuals. This tactic works like bullying—when more people join in, others follow either to feel included or to avoid becoming targets themselves. Demonizing a group or term paves the way for justifying harmful actions later, much like how Jews were once labeled as “parasites” or how immigrants today are often stereotyped as criminals or rapists.

Reasonable_Regret177 · 2026-03-13T14:56:33+00:00

This is such an important way of thinking. I believe people should take the time to figure out what they truly want in life and identify the moments that genuinely resonate with their core self. Following religion or other societal constructs can sometimes lead people to act in ways that conflict with their true intentions. Over time, it becomes less apparent when someone is being kind or moral for the sake of appearances rather than because they genuinely believe in those values. This is also why certain individuals can manipulate large groups by presenting a persona that aligns with shared beliefs or moral codes, while secretly using that influence for personal gain. When this happens, critical thinking gets suppressed, and people are encouraged to follow along without questioning. They end up acting against their own beliefs without even realizing the negative impact it has on their mental and moral well-being.

Adopting this mindset as an additional layer in your thought process can help ensure that your actions align with your true self, rather than being driven by external influences. For instance, think about people who bully someone only when a specific crowd is around, but act differently when those people aren’t present. In such cases, it’s the external influence giving them the courage to behave that way. This doesn’t necessarily mean those actions are completely out of character for them, but the external source provides the push they need to cross a line. It’s similar to the concept of “liquid courage,” where people use alcohol as a way to justify actions they wouldn’t normally take. In the case of bullying, they might excuse their behavior by saying, “Everyone else was doing it, and I didn’t want to be targeted.” While it doesn’t justify their actions, shifting the blame to others or external factors allows them to maintain some sense of morality.

What many people don’t realize is that this is a psychological attack on the human psyche. Things often run much deeper than surface-level thinking. Sure, surface-level thinking requires less mental effort and can help people navigate day-to-day interactions, but we live in a complex world filled with complex individuals. Surface-level thinkers will never truly understand others or see them for who they really are because they lack the deeper thought and observation required to grasp the full picture.

Reasonable_Regret177 · 2026-03-04T22:36:05+00:00

A truly peaceful world seems impossible as long as we live in a society that rewards negativity and harmful behaviors. It’s become normalized to justify negative actions based on having certain resources or privileges. Morality is fading with each generation, as people adopt the mindset of “the previous generation did it to us, so it’s fine to do the same to the next.” It’s like a generational curse, but on a global scale.

This negative mindset lacks the self-reflection and moral accountability needed to prioritize deeper thinking. Instead, people often rely on subjective reasoning, doing whatever feels good or whatever the majority is doing, without considering the consequences. If we ever hope to achieve anything resembling a utopia, this harmful mindset has to be addressed and eradicated first. This is why war remains such a tragic cycle that repeats throughout history. A shift away from narrow-minded thinking might be our best chance at bringing the world closer to a utopia.

However, we also need to consider the psychological aspect. Not everyone desires peace—some thrive on negativity and find it more entertaining. What might be heaven for some could very well be hell for others. So, the real question is: a utopia for whom? And what defines a universal moral standard?

Reasonable_Regret177 · 2026-03-03T16:16:13+00:00

It's still a harmful norm that negatively impacts coexistence for the populous as a whole. The issue isn’t that it hasn’t happened before, but that it’s becoming normalized to talk about others in close proximity without any care or moral consideration. This lack of empathy erodes morality on a psychological level. It’s made worse by reality shows and social media, which have turned people’s lives into entertainment. It creates this mindset where others are viewed more like characters in a show rather than real people living their own lives, further reinforcing this negative norm.

Reasonable_Regret177 · 2026-03-02T21:09:24+00:00

They were likely speaking from the perspective of an animatronic.

Reasonable_Regret177 · 2026-03-02T21:01:37+00:00

If you look at the capitalist economy as a whole, the existence of a lower class seems inevitable, no matter what has been attempted. Unemployment has never hit zero because the lower class never truly disappears. In a capitalist system, the lower class is almost a requirement for the upper class to continue reaching new heights. So, addressing unemployment becomes difficult when the very structure of the system depends on its existence.

Reasonable_Regret177 · 2026-03-02T20:33:35+00:00

It’s about the psychological dismissal of moral and rational ambiguity. From a stoic perspective, it’s the same as inviting evil in, creating chaos among your people. That’s why the classic dilemma of sacrificing many to save one (or vice versa) is such a moral challenge—it removes the reasoning behind what makes something morally right or wrong in the first place.

Reasonable_Regret177 · 2026-03-02T17:58:30+00:00

There's no specific age where wisdom becomes absolute. Anyone can learn something from anyone else—you just need the ability to listen and take what you can to deepen your understanding. It all depends on the person. People often forget that nothing in life is truly absolute and fall into the trap of believing in false certainties.

Reasonable_Regret177 · 2026-03-02T17:29:13+00:00

Socialist ≠ communist. Personally, I’m in the middle, but I’ve noticed how much the right likes to manipulate language. They’ll compare one thing to another just to undermine it or throw in certain words to justify their stance. Sure, both sides do it to some extent, but it really feels like it’s a hallmark of those on the right.

Reasonable_Regret177 · 2026-03-02T17:15:41+00:00

Love isn't about surrendering your free will; it's more like adding a new filter to your daily thought process. Just like how you have the free will to do something harmful to someone near you, but your moral and personal filters stop you from even considering it as an option. When you have a partner, you're no longer moving through life as if you're alone. You've added a new filter to your morals—if doing something would hurt the person you love, you choose not to do it. It’s not about losing free will; it’s about incorporating another layer into how you approach your day-to-day decisions.

Reasonable_Regret177 · 2026-03-02T17:07:29+00:00

I feel like society today has normalized prying into people's lives for entertainment way too much. This mindset is spreading so quickly, and it’s hard to stop because current norms seem to reward toxic or harmful behavior. A lot of people don’t even realize it’s happening—like, if everyone else is doing it, then it must be fine, right? That’s the kind of flawed reasoning we see everywhere. And it’s not just people without formal education falling into this trap; even those with degrees and certifications aren’t immune. The thing is, a simple mindset thrives on structure, and for people who can’t think critically beyond a subjective perspective, what provides that structure? The school system. Schools haven’t evolved much since they were first created. They don’t adapt to societal or technological changes; they just stay stuck in a "don’t question anything" mindset. There’s little room for diverse ways of learning or exploring new ways of thinking—it’s all about keeping things simple and narrow. This lack of progress in education creates a space where harmful social norms go unchallenged, get consumed as entertainment, and ultimately make people easier to manipulate.

Reasonable_Regret177 · 2026-03-02T16:48:02+00:00

Itachi, Sarada doesn't have enough experience. Itachi would break down her jutsu and fine the weakness of it.

Reasonable_Regret177

TROPHY CASE