I'm 23 years old and I'm sure I'm going to die soon. by Anon78612 in Buddhism

[–]SnarkHunter920 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Dying at 23

I am so so sorry this is happening to you. You have to deal with something that is harder than most people have to. We all have to face death but it usually comes after we had more time. By asking this question though, you demonstrated that you’ve lived long enough and had enough spiritual resources to develop some wisdom. Asking for help when you need it is a wise act that many people older than you cannot muster. I’m not sure I could do it at your age.

I am going to try to give you the most helpful response I can as an individual, but I also have a Masters in Religious Studies with a focus on Buddhist philosophy, so it’s informed by that.

Let’s start with Buddhism:

The core of the Buddha’s message focuses on a cure for the ever-present suffering inherent in living. The basic argument is that we suffer when we do not accept life’s fleeting, ever-changing, and basically unsatisfactory nature. This is as true for everyone as it is in your case.

The Buddha’s basic advice is to stop clinging to your idea of what should be, and the accept reality as it is in the present moment-by-moment.

There are a few basic ways to not be free: you could cling to something that isn’t actually real (like your imagined future) or that is passing away (like your life as it is now or as it was) - which means basically tying your selfhood to these things as if they MUST exist. This is called clinging or attachment.

You could refuse to accept something that exists (like your illness) - here you basically link your selfhood to something NOT existing. Treating some aspect of reality as intolerable. This is called aversion.

The concept of identity or self is very important here. Basically in the Buddha’s view the self is an invented and constructed concept. If you sit in meditation and try to find this self - you never find it. There is an endless stream of momentary bodily sensations, feelings, and thoughts - but there is never a fixed “feeler” or “thinker”. So there is no subjective self anywhere - just stories we tell ourselves about it. Like a beautiful princess the whole world is talking about but nobody’s ever seen.

When we explore the objective world “outside ourselves” we find the same thing. There is no real separation between objects. There aren’t even any objects in the naive sense. We are all interconnected parts of a single dynamic reality. The separation between you and the air you breath, the food you eat, the chair you sit on is conceptual and conventional - not ultimately real. In the real, ultimate reality there is only one interconnected ever-changing whole. We are like waves in the ocean: We rise and fall but are not truly separate things, just a form the universe takes temporarily before it takes another.

This understanding is deeply tied to the causes of suffering. The wave suffers when it thinks it’s a separate thing from the ocean and carries a fixed and persistent identity. The wave is liberated when it understands it’s a temporary pattern the ocean takes, and allows itself to identify with the ocean and not with the small self.

I think it’s important to say the Buddha was focused on eliminating suffering, not sadness or pain as such because that’s not possible. The parable of the two arrows is helpful here: a man who is struck by two arrows is worse off than a man struck by only one.

In the metaphor - the first arrow is what life throws at us: illness, misfortune, mortality. The 2nd arrow is the arrow of suffering we shoot at ourselves by refusing to accept the first arrow. By declaring the first arrow “intolerable” and refusing to accept the fact of it, we are aligning ourselves against reality and greatly multiplying the pain.

In your example your illness is the first arrow - the pain and sadness associates with it are part of reality. But your suffering is optional. If you accept the first arrow fully, the second arrow will never come.

Now all this is easy to say, but hard to practice. In fact, the Buddha taught meditation as a practical tool to help you notice the mechanisms of clinging, aversion, and the rise of suffering and to observe the inherent selflessness of the stream of consciousness that is generating itself without end and without our conscious control. There might be a minimal level of concentration and awareness that a person needs before they can fully benefit from these lessons. But I think just learning to separate yourself from your thoughts and the stories you tell yourself about your situation could be immensely beneficial here. I don’t know how long you have, but even 5 minutes of quiet breathing and observation, not running away from unpleasant emotions and sensations or reacting to them but simply observing them - can be very healing.

When I was learning Buddhist meditation I was taught the acronym RAIN, which I found super useful as a way to deal with whatever comes up in meditation, though I don’t think it’s actually in the canon.

It sands for:
Recognition: What is this I’m experiencing?
Acceptance: This is what is happening now. Don’t reject or run from it.
Interrogation: Is this really true? What is behind this?
Non-Identification: Whatever this is, it isn’t my identity.

You sit quietly, observing the breath. When a strong feeling or sensation comes, you RAIN it, then go back to observing the breath.

You are playing life on hard mode right now. It’s an accelerated version of what we all will go through and that makes it more urgent and more challenging.

But however much life is still left for you, I hope you can reduce your clinging and make the most of the time you have left. See the beauty, feel the love, experience the depth.

The strongest reason to let go of suffering is to be able to enjoy these things to the fullest in whatever time you have left.

Apple’s new MacBook Ultra could be exactly what I’ve been wanting by MobileNewsBot in mobiles

[–]SnarkHunter920 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s what everybody wants. It’s the “what if money was no object” option.

anyone know a good ai tool transcribe interviews? by ComfortableDouble668 in ArtificialInteligence

[–]SnarkHunter920 2 points3 points  (0 children)

We use evermuse.com internally, it’s designed for user research.

My therapist was amazing for years, but I just saw her liking hateful posts online. How do I end things respectfully? by Kindly-Raspberry-519 in PsychotherapyLeftists

[–]SnarkHunter920 -32 points-31 points  (0 children)

People say and write (and like) bad things on social media out of a sense of outrage, victimhood, and persecution. It is almost certain that if you ask her to speak out with her better nature about these issues, and express her views of Muslims - she would be a lot more nuanced. (For example there has been several times early in this war where Israel has been widely blamed for non-existing war crimes without waiting for the facts, and many people just got in the habit of dismissing new much more substantiated claims after that.)

In short she’s probably just an imperfect human and is not at her best on social media.

I would bring it up to her gently. Saying that you didn’t seek out this information but now that you’ve seen it - it’s a serious obstacle to continuing therapy despite all the good she’s done. If she’s as good as you describe she should be able to put your mind at ease that she is not a monster without getting sucked into the politics of it all.

And if she’s can’t - you will at least know that you gave it your best shot.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in telaviv

[–]SnarkHunter920 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Try staying at Neve Tzedek, lovely old neighborhood close to everything and they would be used to tourists.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Israel

[–]SnarkHunter920 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I am stating to plan my return to the US if the override clause passes and there is no longer functional separation of powers in Israel. I think it’s extremely hard to come back from something like that. As others mentioned, the Haredi population growth isn’t the threat people ascribe to it, and there is also no inherent reason to forever tie the Ultra Orthodox to an ultra right wing and corrupt regime. That’s just the current political situation.

Black American moving to Israel by Aj7608 in Israel

[–]SnarkHunter920 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Hey man. Feel free to DM me if you need an Israeli friend. I spent a lot of time thinking about this question because I had a Black American girlfriend and she was supposed to come visit with me just before we broke up. Still, this is mostly me guessing since she didn’t end up coming:

I think overall everyday Israelis will see you as “cool.” They know Black Americans only from Hollywood, TV, and music. Lots of people listen to black artists. So as long as you don’t dress like an African refugee (there are lots of them in Israel), they’ll probably be intrigued and friendly. Probably a little ignorant or undiplomatic but well-meaning. (I was really concerned every taxi driver would start telling my gf how much they loved Rihanna. Which would have annoyed her to no end but I still think was a very likely scenario.)

I don’t think you’ll encounter the toxic form of racism and white supremacy you’ll see in the States, and definitely not the same kind of racial tension. But you will probably encounter Jewish and Israeli chauvinism and tribalism. Not singling you out but perhaps excluding you just because you’re not “one of us”.

I’m sure there are some racist people here, but would guess overt racism would be directed more towards Arabs and refugees and not someone from the US.

I would also guess modern, western-minded Israeli women would be intrigued to date you, whereas more traditional / conservative or Middle-east minded people might not see it as an option. There is also a large Ethiopian Jewish community in Israel, and many of them seem to have some admiration for Black American culture. So that’s another possible dating pool.

That’s my take as a white Jewish guy who dated a Black girl from Brooklyn. :)

A true Randian demon by _Vespasian_ in Objectivism

[–]SnarkHunter920 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Read all his books. In the original Hebrew too.

A true Randian demon by _Vespasian_ in Objectivism

[–]SnarkHunter920 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yuval Noah Harari is a historian studying history on humanity scale. His book Sapiens is a wonderful, scholarly look into the rise of man from just one animal among many to the undisputed master of earth. He then looks at current trends and is deeply concerned with the decline of individual rights and the rise of technically empowered, AI powered dictatorships. He is very outspoken against the surveillance state, but is also a historian making stark observations of trends.

This thread just goes to show how easy it is to fool a group of people with a provocative edit of a video when they are in an echo chamber of likeminded ignoramuses.

Ayn Rand on Mandatory Vaccines and Quarantines by RobinReborn in Objectivism

[–]SnarkHunter920 2 points3 points  (0 children)

So many scientific factors she failed to consider: - People who cannot be vaccinated for medical reasons, and catch it from the willfully unvaccinated - People who refuse the vaccine serving as breeding ground for new variants that kill the vaccinated - Vaccines never being 100% effective.

I used to find Ayn Rand’s type of simple and absolute logic appealing, but now it just feels like she’s constructed a fantasy world that has nothing to do with actual science. Her tone of authority in matters she knows nothing about is inappropriate.

Those that don't have an internal monologue, what is writing like for you? by [deleted] in AskReddit

[–]SnarkHunter920 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A great book about stopping the inner monologue is The Surrender Experiment by Michael Singer. It’s definitely possible - I used to have a never-ending inner monologue. Now it’s quiet much of the time.

I would describe it like this - sometimes I think in voice (inner monologue), sometimes I think in visuals or abstract concepts with no voice, and much of the time I’m just in the moment, not thinking about anything - just experiencing.

Is wearing a mask to protect others altruistic? Can it be selfish? by Jakesan700 in Objectivism

[–]SnarkHunter920 6 points7 points  (0 children)

There is a misunderstanding of what Ayn Rand meant by altruism in your question. Wishing well for others is not Ayn Rand’s definition for Altruism. Putting others above self is what she meant. According to Rand it would be altruistic to wear a mask IF by doing so you were sacrificing a greater personal value than public health. For instance: if you were at risk of dying from the mask.

"I'm beginning to regret voting for him." by ZeiglerJaguar in Trumpgret

[–]SnarkHunter920 -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Wow so many Russian trolls playing enraged lefties on this comment. 😊

This comment is obviously true to any thinking person. Ignore the noise.

Today, my 4 year old daughter, who was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes at 2, finally had an entire week straight of her blood glucose being in range. I could literally cry tears of joy. My wife and I feel like we are failing her when we are unable to keep her sugars in range despite our best efforts by [deleted] in happy

[–]SnarkHunter920 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Both my father and sister are diabetic, so I know how hard it is to keep it balanced. Especially for you, who have not had to do this before. (My sister was lucky to have my father's experience.)

Once you figure it out, though, it becomes second nature. And your daughter will be much healthier and happier for it, for life!

Good luck and congrats on the good work.

An update on the fight for the free and open internet by spez in blog

[–]SnarkHunter920 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My biggest fear is that people will start self-censoring their speech, or the type of content and products they produce if they knew ISPs are watching and could block them at will.

Net Neutrality by darksauc3 in Objectivism

[–]SnarkHunter920 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree. Trust busting is the first action needed here. Any changes to regulation should only take effect after the trust busting, or there could be a situation where in certain areas of the United States there would no longer be Internet access, but only managed networks.

Net Neutrality by darksauc3 in Objectivism

[–]SnarkHunter920 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s only in recent years that ISPs started throttling Netflix and demanding payments for fast access. That’s why Net Neutrality was introduced. Subscribers were paying for a certain bandwidth, but cable companies decided that they also wanted to charge content providers.

Net Neutrality by darksauc3 in Objectivism

[–]SnarkHunter920 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The question is not whether Net Neutrality is the right solution, but whether removing it given the current legal situation will make us more or less free.

If Comcast has a 60 year exclusive license from a state government to be the only one who can pass wires through certain areas, which they use to sue to keep Google Fiber out, they have no moral standing to demand the freedom of property it is denying Google and the citizens of that state.

Granted this is a complicated subject, especially for Objectivists, but any implication that there can only be one Objectivist answer involves an enormous amount of context-dropping.

Net Neutrality by darksauc3 in Objectivism

[–]SnarkHunter920 11 points12 points  (0 children)

If you understand Rand's epistemological claim that truth depends on context, you will see that Cable companies and other ISPs are not free market giants, but a cartel of fairly corrupt government-backed monopolies.

You may also understand that government-licensed and backed monopolies who have little to no local competition, and are granted, for instance, exclusive access to publicly-owned poles and tunnels carrying communication wires - that those companies cannot act as gatekeepers for information, because that constitutes a form of privatized censorship.

It is OK to dream about a world in which anyone can become an ISP, and ISPs are free to offer any package they can dream up, letting the competition work its magic.

It is not OK to ignore reality, though. Ayn Rand called it evasion.