h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Hey, great entry. Love is the most important thing in the world, but almost nobody knows what it is! But basically one thing people SHOULD know is that Hollywood and Television are not good and reliable sources of guidance on the question.

I'll say a bit more later!

Exactly! Not to say that I know what love is, myself... I *am* just a teenager... but I do observe quite a bit.

CS Lewis wrote a lovely book on love (and the different divisions thereof, of which he names four), but for some reason the Mods won't let me tell people titles of published works, so you'll have to find it for yourself if you're interested.

I've read a lot of what C.S. Lewis has written, so maybe I've read it. Anyways, what I dislike about the way love is presented in the media is that it is always a kind of selfish love. For instance if a guy "loves" a girl he always wants to have her all to himself. Whereas someone who loves her in a less selfish way will not mind if she finds somebody else who is perhaps a better person for her. There is a kind of love that is concerned with other people's wellbeing independent of the person feeling the love; this is not love of the romantic kind. But it is still a kind of love that I think is very necessary in the world. Personally I love all living creatures, in the sense that I want things to be as good as possible for all living things, even if I cannot get anything tangible back from the majority of them, even if I can never even know anything at all about the majority of them.

I've read a lot of what C.S. Lewis has written, so maybe I've read it. Anyways, what I dislike about the way love is presented in the media is that it is always a kind of selfish love. For instance if a guy "loves" a girl he always wants to have her all to himself. Whereas someone who loves her in a less selfish way will not mind if she finds somebody else who is perhaps a better person for her. There is a kind of love that is concerned with other people's wellbeing independent of the person feeling the love; this is not love of the romantic kind. But it is still a kind of love that I think is very necessary in the world. Personally I love all living creatures, in the sense that I want things to be as good as possible for all living things, even if I cannot get anything tangible back from the majority of them, even if I can never even know anything at all about the majority of them.

Oh, if only there were more people like you in the world... then it'd be such a better place.

I think perhaps the only thing I really hate is ignorance and apathetic stupidity... I guess that's a good thing, eh?

I think your right about apathy. I think that indifference is the real evil. The evil that goes beyond evil. Hatred is one thing but indifference has to be worse. (and more irritating).

Yeah, I also think apathy is the worst. But why are people apathetic? I think people are apathetic because they themselves haven't been loved enough, or have been ignored too much.

Quite possibly true... apathy probably *does* come from a lack of love... whether on the side of the person being apathetic or in his/her life.

It's just like the saying that you must be able to love in order to hate-- indifference is simply not trying at all.

You know, people very much learn by example. The only people who really don't respond to stimuli are autistic children and others who have a kind of inherent disability. But 'healthy' people tend to respond to other people, and to challenges. If other people respond back at them, they will then continue. I think many of our modern apathetic individuals are that way because of the school system, or their parents neglecting them, or television. Why schools? Because it can easily happen that kids are ignored. Okay, I went to school in South Africa, not America or Britain, but in our schools many children were basically ignored by teachers. The very brightest kids got attention, and those who always got in trouble got attention, and the rest were ignored.

Parents can ignore children for many reasons, but I expect an important reason is that the parents have to work so hard that they simply don't have time and energy left for the kids. But the kids interpret it as that their parents don't care, and so they grow up not caring.

The TV? Well, basically, you sit and watch all these horrible things happening, and it makes no sense for you to respond to them. So you learn not to respond. And your emotions become blunted. TV turns people apathetic - that's a fact. I hardly ever watch TV. I only watch it to get info I need to apply in my life - I never watch it for passive entertainment. Passive entertainment is the scourge of modern society. It is our doom - our civilisation is going down the tubes.

You know, people very much learn by example. The only people who really don't respond to stimuli are autistic children and others who have a kind of inherent disability. But 'healthy' people tend to respond to other people, and to challenges. If other people respond back at them, they will then continue. I think many of our modern apathetic individuals are that way because of the school system, or their parents neglecting them, or television. Why schools? Because it can easily happen that kids are ignored. Okay, I went to school in South Africa, not America or Britain, but in our schools many children were basically ignored by teachers. The very brightest kids got attention, and those who always got in trouble got attention, and the rest were ignored.

Parents can ignore children for many reasons, but I expect an important reason is that the parents have to work so hard that they simply don't have time and energy left for the kids. But the kids interpret it as that their parents don't care, and so they grow up not caring.

The TV? Well, basically, you sit and watch all these horrible things happening, and it makes no sense for you to respond to them. So you learn not to respond. And your emotions become blunted. TV turns people apathetic - that's a fact. I hardly ever watch TV. I only watch it to get info I need to apply in my life - I never watch it for passive entertainment. Passive entertainment is the scourge of modern society. It is our doom - our civilisation is going down the tubes.

I think it's very true that children learn by example-- and so did their parents (er, obvious!). I know that even at my school (which caters, unfortunately, to the smarter individuals) there are plenty of very intelligent individuals (of which I am one... *modest blush* (I gave up playing that down years ago... )) who are very apathetic to either school or life in general. School is easier to explain-- they've learned from their experiences that they can "just slide by" by not caring; what they turn out from minimal effort is decent enough to get a B, and that's good enough. *hangs head, knowing she's done this too many times to count* Life is a bit harder... maybe it *is*, as you propose, a result of their being overlooked by teachers. They do tend to be the quiet wallflowers... Hmm.

I agree with the parent theory... unfortunately the people who are most fit to be parents either don't want kids, can't have them, or for some reason can't adopt. So many of my friends' parents are so wrapped up in their jobs that if often seems to me that they have little time for their kids, which *should* come first. I was/am lucky enough to have a mom who stays at home, just so I always felt that there was someone who cared for me and was always there for me. Maybe... maybe this whole apathy thing is somehow connected to all the shootings in my country... lack of attention... forcing people to live lives of apathy because they know nothing else... and therefore they have little regard for their own life or others'. Hmmm...

I'm not sure I really agree with you about TV. I do in the sense that there's a lot of junk on the tube, now more than ever. Pointless violence, promiscious sex, and vengence are portrayed daily, even on *kid's shows*... yes, I, too, have been known to watch an episode of X-Men once in a while.... Kids become numbed to all these things before they even learn exactly what they are and what they mean. I've seen that in myself-- sometimes I, too, can see how random violence is just "part" of the storyline. I hate to say that, but I'm being candid. Luckily, I was taught at some point along the line that killing people is *bad*, whether they're your enemies or not, and if I sit down and think about it, I truly am disturbed, saddened, and pained by even the death of an antagonist in a book or movie.

I disagree with you in the sense that the media is the best way we, as humans with such far-reaching technology, can right these wrongs. We just choose not to, which is unfortunate. There are some shows which do put a value on human life (or alien life, as most of them are sci-fi shows), which find a way to teach morals without being a Sunday School class. What we need is more "reality" in TV, not "reality TV"-- we need characters that show real emotions at even their transgressor's death (I hate shows and movies where the villian is completely evil; that's humanly impossible), real kinds of love, not just animal lust, diplomacy instead of vengence.

Unfortunately, those don't get very good ratings...

Well, it is possible to use the TV and other media for a good purpose. The problem with the TV is that it doesn't express the thoughts and emotions of the characters. When you read a book, you can read in detail about how the characters perceive and feel about the things that happen to them. On TV that's very hard to do. Characters are either shown doing things, or speaking. If I think of my own life, it will be impossible to turn into a TV program, because I probably spend less than a minute, average, per day talking, and the only things I do are watering trees, reading, writing and yes, watching TV very occasionally. Like I said, I do use the TV - I watch mostly nature programs, to inform myself, and sci fi programs and cartoons, to get ideas. But the vast majority of the things I 'do' are actually done 'internally', in my thoughts and emotions. And I'm guessing that is true of many other humans as well. Getting television to be 'realistic', in the sense of actually reflecting the busy inner lives that people have, is going to be rather difficult.

But I think the internet is going to become more important and television less important. I think we will rediscover ourselves by using this technology. Television promotes materialism, but the internet makes thoughts and feelings more accessible. It's interactive, and it's real communication with real people.

I very much agree with you that nobody is completely evil. That to my mind is the worst kind of oversimplification that can be applied to humans. You know, this oversimplification is carried so far as to often represent entire groups of people as evil! For instance, white Afrikaners are often presented as being evil to the very last one. The same kind of thing was done with the Germans during World War II. It is so simple to believe people are evil, but in truth, the real problems of the world are not caused by people who are outright evil, they are caused by people simply being human and fallible.

*nods head in total agreement*

Hmm. So we're on the same wavelength. How boring!

That's a very interesting discussion.
It annoys me slightly that you externalise the problem so much. Of course things like TV and parents have a big influence on people but I think that people should also take responisbility for themselves. I can't say that I am an advocate of mindless violence, sex & revenge TV but I think that it is hard to argue that it's the cause of any kind of deformation of personality. Parents should teach their children about turning the TV off when there's something on it that they don't want to watch.
Everybody is different. People are not all affected by violent TV in the same way. I think censorship can be very harmful as well, including song lyrics. The right to free speech is important. Making laws that are designed specifically to accomodate unstable people could be of detriment to the general populus, because it may take away their rights.

Hey, fluorescent, did you notice I am a member of the Zaphodistas? I am for free speech. I am against using petty laws to try and force people to be nice. I am totally for individual responsibility. To enable people to make responsible choices, I am merely pointing out some things. External things definitely have an influence on a person. I know that because I know how I came to be the person I am. I know that when people are treated very, very badly, they grow up with personality problems and are likely to treat others badly also. The answer? Treat people kindly and encourage people to treat each other kindly. I know that TV promotes apathy. The answer? Watch less TV or at least don't watch TV with an apathetic, uncritical attitude. I watch less TV not because of any laws, but as a result of having read a book written about TV by a person who used to be in the advertising business.

And when I say that children are affected by their parents, my goal is that people who are parents should be more attentive towards their children. I want people to realise that they have important influences on other people, on an individual level. I am stressing the importance of showing people something and not just telling them about it. If I want people to be more loving, the answer is that I should be more loving towards them, so that they can *see* what love looks like.

True, but how a person acts is a combination of what they've observed and what they think. If they haven't observed love, then they won't know how to practice it.

Hmm... censorship verses protecting impressionable children... interesting debate. I'll have to talk more about that later, when I'm not so .

Aren't you happy, things are now less boring, there are some differences of opinion and we can have some potentially thought-provoking discussion!

It's really important that everybody takes as much responisibility for who they are as possible, the good bits and the bad bits.
My boyfriend's mum knows that she can really wind me up by informing me, everytime that I do something a different way from how she or her children would do it that it's because I'm an only child/a leo/ born in the year of the dog. I don't think she knows why this makes me want to scream though.
I don't mind if other people think that I'm going about something the wrong way or doing the wrong thing, as long as they realise that I'm probably doing it like that because I'm expressing an innate 'me'. Events have altered how I look at the world but I enjoy taking responsibility for my actions. In short sometimes I just do things because that's who I am and that's how I choose to act.

True, but my statements in my previous posting still stand: if we haven't learned to take responsibilty for our actions, how can we?

I find that I am very much influenced by other people. A person who has made an impression on me is our country's ex-president Nelson Mandela. He was in jail for twenty six years but when he came out he bore no bitterness, and even though he was a very old man he set to work trying to improve things in the country, not just for black people, but for everybody. Even now that he's retired and in his middle eighties he is still publically active. An example like that teaches me what strength of character and principle is like. It proves to me it is possible to persevere even through extremely harsh circumstances. Albert Schweitzer is also someone who has inspired me, again through demonstrating extreme consideration, responsibility and dedication. If I had never been aware of those and other positive examples my outlook on life, as well as my behaviour, would have been very different.