I respect and admire android

But

> we’re living in a time of great conflict
No we’re not 

> to be well requires peace and community
Only locally 

> To be unaffected amidst conflict is abnormal
We’re not amidst conflict. We’re amidst propaganda and voluntarily consuming entirely too much of it 

Persians and other readers in actual conflict zones: I see you. I feel deeply for you. I wish you as much health, safety, and liberty as can be secured.

Comfy, secure westerners engaging in performative anxiety: gtfo

Comfy, secure westerners actually debilitated by the existence of conflicts abroad: your lifestyle choices are giving you a disease and I strongly encourage you to amend your information diet

i respect you, but if you really "felt deeply" for those people in conflict, you wouldn't be writing this

worrying for someone you connected with, even if you never met irl, is natural and human

fortune cookie casts, memes, parenting, building mini apps, /framedl, /framedl-pro & /calmer

former. people are allowed to feel anxious. and while there are certainly many using the conflict(s) to signal properties they don't posses, i think android has written it with the correct audience in mind

(admittedly "we are all experiencing various degrees of suffering" might be a sort of a leading statement)

I want to start out by saying that I appreciate you engaging thoughtfully and in good faith. The direct subject matter that spawned this talk and the discussion itself are both heavy issues, and I cherish the opportunity to talk with smart people who disagree with me on those kinds of topics. I hope that you see my pushback as a sign that I take you seriously, and not as mere fractiousness.

> people are allowed to feel anxious

Yes, of course. Anxiety is a natural reaction with huge benefits to biological fitness. But it's important to make sure that our evolutionary psychology is a source of useful signals and not a detrimentally dominating influence. And we need to be extra careful to prevent it from being weaponized against us by forces that are not aligned with our health and wellbeing.

> Some of us are [in conflict zones]

Yes, and I really do feel deeply for those who are. If that includes you, please say so (feel free to DM me).

I responded to android's original broad and sweeping claim with another broad and sweeping claim partly because I like the rhetorical effect of doing that and partly because of the norm of writing short posts. There is, of course, infinite nuance.

> physical proximity is not necessary to feel anxious about someone's health

Again, no one would dispute that this is true. But I hope it was clear that I was not addressing people in conflict zones or people with loved ones in conflict zones. If one's grandma is dodging bunker busters in Tehran right now, it would be understandable to be a bit of a mess. If one's taking sick days because of a story one saw on MSNBC, that's indicative of poor adjustment to reality.

> if you felt deeply for them (not saying you have to), likely you wouldn't be feeling well, thus rendering the argument somewhat inconsistent

I still don't see the logical inconsistency. Nor do I believe that feeling deeply for those who are suffering necessarily results in a pathological response. I think it's possible for one's heart to metaphorically bleed without any mental or physical symptoms of illness.

Again, thanks for talking with me about this stuff, for real.

Do you mean that there’s a logical inconsistency between the assertion “I feel deeply for people in conflict zones” and something else I said?

Or are you saying that anyone who felt deeply for people in conflict zones would have the good taste and empathy to refrain from saying that stuff?

Or something else?