#flawed human nature

[wickedzeevyln]

POV

It’s just assumption to read what’s on your thoughts. I’m not a citizen of your mind, though the city is lit bright, I can’t read emotions in your eyes without adding verbs like ‘seem’ or ‘appear’, as in, love seems to be in your eyes. But I can always open up all of me with an intent to understand. Maybe have a feel for hints? Maybe you could pour your heart into my ears so it can course…

[itspileofgoodthings]

one of the things that continues to strike me on reread is how much the character of Darcy, and Austen through him, finds Mr. Bennet dead. And how much Elizabeth, in growing and changing and discarding her past blindness, has to move past her way of seeing her father and thus of seeing reality, because the two are connected! Darcy’s letter exposes her father’s flaws to Elizabeth in a way she’d never been able to see before. Most especially the way his laziness and neglect of his own gifts have hurt his family and that ultimately he doesn’t. care. Not enough to change. It literally says that she comes home from Hunsford and tries to laugh at her sisters’ and mother’s folly (the way she used to; the way her father has taught her to by example for her whole life) and she can’t anymore! It sticks in her throat. She is grieved by the failures that she sees in him, all the more so because she IS his favorite and she loves him! And the thing about Mr. Bennet is he never changes. The Lydia/wickham situation exposes to him sharply his own conduct and the consequences and he feels it! Because he is neither stupid nor unfeeling. But he, like everyone, has free will. And he chooses not to change when the opportunity presents itself. He even jokes about how quickly his feeling bad will pass and how soon everything will go back to normal, to his laziness and his selfishness. He is set in his ways and he serves as a contrast to Elizabeth’s personal journey because he embodies a version of a person she could have become and was in danger of becoming if her only goal at all times was to laugh at and judge people from the sidelines.

[demadogs]

some of you need to hate ai way more than you currently do

[novelconcepts]

In watching more interviews with Liv about Van and the escalation of Van's pragmatism to such dark degrees, I find myself genuinely baffled that anyone could ever think Van the bad guy. I mean, I'm perplexed at finding ANY of these girls The Bad Guy. The bad guy is the situation. It's being lost. It's freezing. It's starving. It's being scraped down to the barest bone of being alive. They make choices that might be snippy, or cruel, or hard-headed, sure--Shauna refusing to just hash it out with Jackie; Jackie being too stubborn to come inside; Taissa refusing to discuss her situation plainly; etc--but by the time we reach the end of season 2, it doesn't even matter. Petty bullshit doesn't matter. Jealousy doesn't matter. Those things are still going to be present and complicated, because--for all their choices, for all the distancing they're trying to do--these kids ARE still human beings. But it isn't the point.

The point is survival. Plain, simple, straightforward. Van's pragmatism is survival. It is the difference between living another day with blood on your teeth or dying pretty. It is the difference between fighting forward through the fire and the snow and the hell of it all, and laying down to die. Van knowing, in watching the ritual violence of Shauna beating Lottie nearly the death, that they will be killing and eating one another soon. Van coming up with the cards for the hunt. Van not blinking when the moment comes, Van choosing a weapon that doubles as a tool to bring the body back, Van refusing to apologize for staying alive--it's not evil. It's not Bad Guy behavior. It's purely about survival, because there is nothing else left to her--or to any of them. They can play the pretty little Sweet Angel Girl game and die, or they can get dirty, bloody, horrific and fight. Van chooses the fight. Van chooses to fight for herself, for her lover, for her team, even knowing not everyone is going to make it out...because the alternate path there is that no one makes it out. Van knew the baby wouldn't live. Van knows the rest of them won't, either. Not unless they start making the hard choices.

And, honestly, the fact that Van sees this narrative coming. Comes up with this plan. Brings out the cards. To me, that is the opposite of Bad Behavior. That is as close to justice as anyone can find in the wilderness. If someone else came up with an idea, maybe it would have come down to voting--but that would have had such a human element to it, with bitterness or hostility or whatever ultimately petty shit always comes of humans selecting who to Other. The cards don't leave room for that. It isn't fair, because the situation isn't fair, because Man vs. Nature isn't fair, but it's as close to a just system as they could possibly find. It's the kindest solution to an unwinnable game. Not to bring it back to American Gods again, but all I can think is "it's easy, there's a trick to it: you do it, or you die." Van gave them that.

[can-of-w0rmz]

THOSE Frankenstein fans when both Victor and the Creature have positive and negative qualities, and the story is a tragedy where both characters involved are flawed and it’s not a morality battle between who’s the innocent one and who’s the Bad Guy™️ (and then get pissed at anyone likes one of those characters and labels them as problematic like we’re in the fucking 2020 Danganronpa fandom):

Just while we’re at it, Frankenstein is not a weak whiny bitch and the Creature doesn’t have no moral compass and didn’t emerge from the operating table murderous

Frankenstein IS vastly immature and incapable of communicating his emotions and considering the consequences of his actions bar a few instances and the Creature is basically an incel serial killer

Now shut the fuck up with the “who’s the victim, Victor or the Creature?” bullshit arguments and agree they’re both pathetic morally flawed babygirls and collectively up the fan content for our best girl who deserved so much better Elizabeth Lavenza my beloved wife

[idliketobeatree]

eternally funny to me that in the book Aziraphale's moral compass is "I'm an angel. I can do no wrongs. I go along with Heaven! jk haha I would kill a child if necessary" and Crowley has a whole personal list of the 10 Demonic Commandments he won't cross

[rowrowronnie]

why the hell has no one been talking about the pantheon show on amc why the hell is there legitimately No Way to watch the show without pirating and again, to reiterate: WHY THE HELL HAS NO ONE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS SHOW!!!!

[jrueships]

zesty lowkey just another way for str8 ppl to say faggot / faggy and get away with it

[oifaaa]

The only way for Jason to be the favorite is to fucking die

Yeah but only when he's dead if he goes and ruins it by coming back to life again then he's no longer the favourite child these are just facts

[omegaphilosophia]

The Philosophy of Shakespeare

The philosophy of Shakespeare refers to the exploration of philosophical themes, questions, and ideas within the works of William Shakespeare. While Shakespeare was not a philosopher in the traditional sense, his plays and sonnets are rich with philosophical insights that address issues related to human nature, ethics, politics, love, fate, identity, and the human condition. Scholars and readers alike have long examined how Shakespeare’s writings engage with philosophical concepts and how these concepts are dramatized through his characters and narratives.

Key Themes in the Philosophy of Shakespeare:

Human Nature and the Human Condition:

Complexity of the Human Psyche: Shakespeare's characters are known for their psychological depth and complexity. His works explore the multifaceted nature of human beings, including the tensions between reason and emotion, ambition and morality, and appearance and reality.

The Tragic Flaw (Hamartia): Many of Shakespeare’s tragedies revolve around the concept of a tragic flaw, a characteristic that leads to the downfall of the protagonist. This theme raises philosophical questions about free will, fate, and the moral consequences of human actions.

Ethics and Morality:

Good and Evil: Shakespeare’s works frequently grapple with the nature of good and evil, exploring the moral ambiguities of his characters' actions. Plays like Macbeth and Othello delve into the corrupting influence of power, jealousy, and ambition.

Justice and Revenge: The tension between justice and revenge is a recurring theme, particularly in plays like Hamlet and The Merchant of Venice. These works examine the ethics of retribution, the consequences of revenge, and the pursuit of justice.

Fate and Free Will:

Destiny and Choice: Shakespeare often explores the tension between fate and free will, questioning the extent to which characters are in control of their own destinies. Romeo and Juliet and Macbeth are notable examples where the characters' actions seem predestined, yet their choices play a crucial role in their outcomes.

Prophecy and Foreknowledge: The use of prophecy, as seen in Macbeth and Julius Caesar, raises philosophical questions about whether knowledge of the future alters the course of events or if it leads inevitably to the fulfillment of that future.

Identity and Self-Knowledge:

The Fluidity of Identity: In plays like Twelfth Night and As You Like It, Shakespeare explores the fluidity of identity, particularly through themes of disguise and mistaken identity. These themes challenge the fixed nature of identity and raise questions about self-knowledge and authenticity.

Self-Deception: Characters in Shakespeare’s plays often engage in self-deception, either out of pride, fear, or desire. This theme is particularly prominent in King Lear and Hamlet, where characters’ inability to see themselves or their situations clearly leads to tragedy.

Politics and Power:

The Nature of Authority: Shakespeare’s historical plays and tragedies frequently address the nature of political power and authority. Richard III, Henry V, and Julius Caesar explore the ethics of leadership, the legitimacy of rulership, and the corrupting influence of power.

The Body Politic: The metaphor of the body politic, where the state is likened to a human body, is a recurring theme. In plays like Coriolanus and Measure for Measure, Shakespeare examines the health of the state and the moral responsibilities of rulers.

Love and Relationships:

Romantic Love: Shakespeare’s comedies and tragedies offer deep reflections on the nature of love, its joys, and its perils. Plays like Romeo and Juliet and Much Ado About Nothing explore the idealization of romantic love, the pain of unrequited love, and the complexities of human relationships.

Friendship and Loyalty: Beyond romantic love, Shakespeare also delves into themes of friendship and loyalty, as seen in The Merchant of Venice and Julius Caesar. These relationships often raise questions about the conflicts between personal loyalty and public duty.

Appearance vs. Reality:

Illusion and Truth: Many of Shakespeare’s plays involve themes of appearance versus reality, where characters and situations are not what they seem. Hamlet and Othello are prime examples of how deception and the search for truth drive the plot and philosophical inquiry.

Theatricality of Life: Shakespeare often blurs the line between reality and performance, as seen in As You Like It's famous "All the world's a stage" monologue. This raises philosophical questions about the nature of reality, the roles people play in life, and the construction of identity.

Mortality and the Meaning of Life:

Death and the Afterlife: Shakespeare’s works are deeply concerned with mortality, the fear of death, and the unknown aspects of the afterlife. Hamlet's "To be, or not to be" soliloquy is one of the most famous meditations on existence and the fear of what comes after death.

The Transience of Life: The fleeting nature of life and the inevitability of death are recurrent themes, particularly in Shakespeare’s sonnets and tragedies. These reflections often lead to a broader contemplation of the meaning and value of life.

Philosophical Skepticism:

Doubt and Certainty: Shakespeare’s characters often grapple with doubt and uncertainty, questioning their beliefs, their perceptions, and the world around them. This skepticism is evident in Hamlet's introspection and in King Lear's descent into madness.

Relativism and Perspective: Shakespeare frequently presents multiple perspectives within his plays, allowing for a relativistic view of truth and morality. This multiplicity of viewpoints invites the audience to question the nature of truth and the reliability of perception.

The philosophy of Shakespeare is not a unified doctrine but rather a rich and varied exploration of fundamental human concerns. Through his characters and narratives, Shakespeare engages with philosophical questions about human nature, morality, power, love, identity, and existence. His works continue to inspire philosophical inquiry, offering insights that are as relevant today as they were in the Elizabethan era.

[cherry-treelane]

everytime i feel bad and stressed about my life i remember that i might be in a troubling situation and having a bad time but im not season 4 fiona gallagher in the clink after leaving crack on the counter which my 3 year old baby brother happened to ingest resulting in a fatal near-death experience thats wracked me with never-ending guilt and forever altered my life

[dairyfreenugget]

I could count the amount of original stories of mine that don't have horror elements on one hand and idk what that says about me

[itspileofgoodthings]

deeply loving something or someone does not equal (≠) worshipping something. connecting with an artist’s body of work does not equal (≠) being invested in a celebrity for no reason besides their fame and power and money. hope this helps.

[locuas642]

I just saw someone say that Greek Mythology is about Intergenerational Trauma and Abuse. and

I kinda want to scream.

[redstrewn]

I want leander to shock us simps so bad. Like jaw drop. Like baffle us with a complete 180 on his outward personality to his inward one. A total fucking asswipe bitch. Just fucken floor us. I think it would be amazing. Just have us levitating only to crash us onto the ground like a bad trip. I think it would be fun.

[musical-chick-13]

Regarding the previous post, I think the way I approach trying to evaluate a piece of art is asking "Do I think the positive things I get out of it outweigh the parts of it that I don't like?" And when I call something a "guilty pleasure" song/show/book/piece of media/etc. it's really more in the sense of, "Given who I am as a person, the flaws I've found in this should be complete dealbreakers for me, but somehow they aren't, and it makes me feel like I'm having an identity crisis."