I need decisionmaking help re: book collection

christie2

Robin
Woman
Orthodox
✓Silent Spring by Rachel Carson1962/2002 First Mariner Books
✓How to Give-An Ancient Guide to Giving and Receiving by Seneca this translation 2020 by Princeton University Press(a now deceased man I was messaging with November 2020 recommended this philosopher, I'm grateful he did, what a gift)
✓Robert Frost's Poems 1930/1962 commentary by Louis Untermeyer Washington Square Press, Inc. NY
✓ Selected Short Stories by H.G. Wells 1927/1978 Penguin Books
✓ Never Cry Wolf by Farley Mowat1979Seal book published byMcClelland and Stewart-Bantam Ltd
✓People of the Deer by Farley Mowat1951/1965McClelland and Stewart Limited
✓The Gift of Fear by Gavin de Becker1997published by Dell Publishing a division of Random House, Inc.
 
Last edited:

christie2

Robin
Woman
Orthodox
✓The Desperate People-Death of a People-The Ihalmiut1959/1975 by Farley Mowat Little, Brown & Company
✓Universe in Your Pocket edited by Laura Ward2007elwinstreetdotcom
✓World Peace'Really' One [email protected] Time by Ron Medved & Gregg Cochlan2010 Pacific Institute
✓Emotional Intelligence by Daniel Goleman2005bantamdelldotcom
 

Lights

Woodpecker
I hope I can help the reader with something in return for your help.
I miss interacting on the forum and need help.
There's a couple of questions in this thread and some emotional attachment signs.



How does one cull books?
I am paying an expensive fee for storage and find it extremely difficult to think of parting with my books.

I know I must cut down on the number, right? I am being a hoarder by keeping so many.

When I did this, one other time in my life, at the time I left my parents, I wrote down the titles before they vanished.

I have found over the last two and a half decades, that I miss those books very much.

Its like I feel physical pain that I've lost these 'old friends'. Deep regret, yet I haven't replaced those books, I now realise.

Its not practical or rational to pay a storage place to keep your library. The time in storage may be up to one year or so, until I get my house.

These books make up the majority of my possessions.



If you were to go about reducing your collection, how would you do it?

Just keep one book by each author?

Just keep the books you've read more than twice?

My books are approximately 85% nonfiction and 15% fiction.

I briefly thought of buying a handheld scanning device and digitizing them.
But then I must rely on having the technology available to me to 'playback' the books.

I could try to memorise them all....ridiculously gargantuan task, I know.

They represent so much hardearned money.

They are comforting.

Marie Kondo once wrote: collections represent facets of personality experienced during different life stages. She wrote about the girl who kept different hobby supplies and sports equipment that reminded her of the different boyfriends she had.

I have these next 11 days off work.

I will be moving these books into the new storage.
I know this could be the perfect opportunity to make quick, pragmatic snap decisions on donating or selling.

But I'm not looking forward to the regret.

I am also concerned in a self-parental way, that my inability to make this decision is some type of inertial depression and unhealthy emotional attachment.

My realist dream is to have a multi bedroom house and one of the bedrooms becomes dedicated as my den, my library and reading room.

Other rooms will be dedicated to writing and then painting.

The house I'm moving the books out of, is too small for my books. I am hostage to finding living space for these books.

About 20% of the books I own, I haven't read yet.
They were bought with the intention of providing myself variety for reading choices as I get older.
I truly created my own library of choices, where I can browse and 'check-out' a new book for pleasure.

I think I just wrote myself into keeping these books.

I used to have the same dilemma. I had an intense emotional attachment to my books and would lug them around with me wherever I went.

And still tried to be "nomadic" or whatever. I'd take them all with me. One day I decided I had to get rid of them to be as free as I wanted. It was very difficult but I did not even donate them. I dumped them in the trash. And I felt immediately relieved after.

I am the type of person that abhors "things." Accumulating "things" makes me actually sick. I always feel better after I get rid of everything.

But I used to think my books were indispensable, until I got rid of them. I thought it almost criminal, but the reality was I was just attached to some "things."

But that's just me.

I had to decide what was more important, "possessing" these books, or being free and weightless the way I wanted.

Now I have a rule that I can only get one book at a time, and after I am done I have to get rid of it before I get another one.

The first book I did this with was "Scar Tissue" by Anthony Kiedis. I do not remember why I chose that book, but I really enjoyed it. I would read it at night in my van before I went to sleep. This was like 2017.

Then I did it with "American Psycho" by Bret Easton Ellis. I read that twice. I enjoy post modern literature of the 90s and things set in New York City at that time. Actually, maybe not so much anymore because the world is so depressing to me, I cannot even allow myself the luxury of nostalgia for some ridiculous time which is irrelevant. But back then I was into it.

I'd like to add that in general people tend to act as if books are the end all be all of knowledge. Truth is, a lot of books are not worth the time, are full of garbage, and also people can also use books to manipulate information in many ways. Even supposedly good books, academic books. Books can be just as deceptive and brainwashing as anything else. So they should be read as critically as if you were speaking to a person you did not trust, in my opinion, before you let your mind get swayed here and there.

Finally, I think you know in your heart what the real situation is as far as keeping your books or whatever. Until you follow your heart's inclination, you will remain in a state of unease.
 

Starlight

Kingfisher
Woman
Protestant
I used to have the same dilemma. I had an intense emotional attachment to my books and would lug them around with me wherever I went.

And still tried to be "nomadic" or whatever. I'd take them all with me. One day I decided I had to get rid of them to be as free as I wanted. It was very difficult but I did not even donate them. I dumped them in the trash. And I felt immediately relieved after.

I am the type of person that abhors "things." Accumulating "things" makes me actually sick. I always feel better after I get rid of everything.

But I used to think my books were indispensable, until I got rid of them. I thought it almost criminal, but the reality was I was just attached to some "things."

But that's just me.

I had to decide what was more important, "possessing" these books, or being free and weightless the way I wanted.

Now I have a rule that I can only get one book at a time, and after I am done I have to get rid of it before I get another one.

The first book I did this with was "Scar Tissue" by Anthony Kiedis. I do not remember why I chose that book, but I really enjoyed it. I would read it at night in my van before I went to sleep. This was like 2017.

Then I did it with "American Psycho" by Bret Easton Ellis. I read that twice. I enjoy post modern literature of the 90s and things set in New York City at that time. Actually, maybe not so much anymore because the world is so depressing to me, I cannot even allow myself the luxury of nostalgia for some ridiculous time which is irrelevant. But back then I was into it.

I'd like to add that in general people tend to act as if books are the end all be all of knowledge. Truth is, a lot of books are not worth the time, are full of garbage, and also people can also use books to manipulate information in many ways. Even supposedly good books, academic books. Books can be just as deceptive and brainwashing as anything else. So they should be read as critically as if you were speaking to a person you did not trust, in my opinion, before you let your mind get swayed here and there.

Finally, I think you know in your heart what the real situation is as far as keeping your books or whatever. Until you follow your heart's inclination, you will remain in a state of unease.
It’s not like she has an extensive Stephen King collection here… @christie2 the books you’ve listed so far have real world and intrinsic value. Don’t dump them into the garbage.
 
Last edited:

Lights

Woodpecker
It’s not like she has an extensive Stephen King collection here… @christie2 the books you’ve listed so far have intrinsic value. Don’t dump them into the garbage.
I didn't tell "her" to dump, them, I only said what I did.

ALSO, by the way, I did not realize this is a ladies section that you are women supposedly. If I did I would not have posted.

And you don't have to "dislike" my post, ok, I mean why would "you" even do that, whoever you are.

That is a rhetorical question.

Value is relative, and that is your opinion.

The fact that you, WHOEVER YOU ARE, "disliked" my post, is ridiculous.
 

christie2

Robin
Woman
Orthodox
Hi @Lights I wanted to say thank you for your post.
You are a good writer and I'll tell you why.
I was able to follow along with the thought processes and feel the emotions you describe and imagine how I could react if I did the same thing.

I remember Bret Easton Ellis too, I believe it was 'less than zero'.
I had to read it after seeing that movie. I grew up in a bigger city northwest of New York City but not as big, and I was exposed to many types of people and cliques.

Maybe consider keep on writing. Your message was clear to me and I'm grateful you took the time to share.

As for the like buttons, it is unfortunate we even have the dislike button as a choice here on the forum, I know it can sting and twice now I've swept through my own profile's latest activity and tapped on the 'likes' I've sprinkled and removed every one of them. No doubt I've left good people out when I've liked one and not another.
I've 'disliked' at least two posts, explained one and not the other and felt remorseful about that.
I can ask that when you're wondering about a profile persona that has replied or reacted to you, try first to view their 'find' content or 'find' threads or latest activity on their profile or failing that, have a random look around in forums. Yes, you're in the ladies forum, but it is open to everyone to post. You may see other posts by the same profile persona whether they are human or potentially robot or artificial intelligence or don't forget, even potentially a man that's fibbing at being a woman....this used to be a player forum, its highly likely a lot of female profiles could be lying males.
Some real ladies have a tomboy brain(hello) so it makes it that much harder to discern, don't give up. Now that I'm baptised and praying more and reading more of God's Word again, I'm successfully being retrained to act submissively and to hold my tongue more often no matter what I'm thinking.

Again, thank you Lights for sharing.

I decided my lack of a personal library is more dread-full than my freedom from possessions. I have this experience of having closed libraries and bookstores during this recent scamdemic and it was horrifying to me to be far from my own library and not have access to others' libraries.

I think I just realised I need to make academic friends so I can access their libraries.

Some of your warnings, Lights, are the same warnings my brother used to warn me about. He was always disgusted if I chose to read rather than play. Thanks for sharing them.

I will be done today with the portion of my collection that I have here in storage. In a month I get another load to cull through.

I've ripped up and thrown out ten. The remaining ones are prayed over and protected with love.

I stopped listing because I feel its not socially calibrated and autistic or something to list on an internet forum.
Noone else is doing this, I don't want to be the only one and I don't want anyone attacked that was supporting/encouraging me to list, so I've stopped writing them here.
 
Last edited:

christie2

Robin
Woman
Orthodox
I used to have the same dilemma. I had an intense emotional attachment to my books and would lug them around with me wherever I went.

And still tried to be "nomadic" or whatever. I'd take them all with me. One day I decided I had to get rid of them to be as free as I wanted. It was very difficult but I did not even donate them. I dumped them in the trash. And I felt immediately relieved after.

I am the type of person that abhors "things." Accumulating "things" makes me actually sick. I always feel better after I get rid of everything.

But I used to think my books were indispensable, until I got rid of them. I thought it almost criminal, but the reality was I was just attached to some "things."

But that's just me.

I had to decide what was more important, "possessing" these books, or being free and weightless the way I wanted.

Now I have a rule that I can only get one book at a time, and after I am done I have to get rid of it before I get another one.

The first book I did this with was "Scar Tissue" by Anthony Kiedis. I do not remember why I chose that book, but I really enjoyed it. I would read it at night in my van before I went to sleep. This was like 2017.

Then I did it with "American Psycho" by Bret Easton Ellis. I read that twice. I enjoy post modern literature of the 90s and things set in New York City at that time. Actually, maybe not so much anymore because the world is so depressing to me, I cannot even allow myself the luxury of nostalgia for some ridiculous time which is irrelevant. But back then I was into it.

I'd like to add that in general people tend to act as if books are the end all be all of knowledge. Truth is, a lot of books are not worth the time, are full of garbage, and also people can also use books to manipulate information in many ways. Even supposedly good books, academic books. Books can be just as deceptive and brainwashing as anything else. So they should be read as critically as if you were speaking to a person you did not trust, in my opinion, before you let your mind get swayed here and there.

Finally, I think you know in your heart what the real situation is as far as keeping your books or whatever. Until you follow your heart's inclination, you will remain in a state of unease.
Thank you again, I screenshotted your post to reread before going through my books.
 

christie2

Robin
Woman
Orthodox
I came across one of my journal entries that had an old list of former books...the books I had before the big cull of moving out of my Mom & Dad's at 23.
I haven't felt the urge to replace or reread those books from that list, interestingly.
 

messaggera

Pelican
Woman
Other Christian
Collecting books is too easy in our area.

We have a nonprofit space on a few acres that hold art classes, community gardening, and executive meetings ( use to schedule office retreats). I buy/ donate a lot of times for the books that are donated for reselling. What a treasure this place is for old and informative books. Most come from estate sales.

Then we have a huge antique mall that carries old books, along with a rural nature center that takes books to resell for donations. And I just picked up nine hardcover books for $5.00 from our local library sale.

My husband and I have considered building a wall bookshelf niche on both sides of a window in our homeschool room.

I try to buy old books for the children for when they grow up to have a baseline of traditional knowledge. The books we have are just too valuable to remove from our home.
 

Kitty Tantrum

Kingfisher
Woman
Catholic
I have a ton of books I've never read, and continue to pick up more. I recently converted our under-the-stairs-closet into a small library.

I understand not wanting to be burdened by material things, but when one has a family with children to teach and raise, the option of being "free and weightless" is already necessarily precluded - and having a solid library (as a repository of information, not just "stories" to consume for pleasure) is a benefit rather than any additional burden. I do not count on public libraries, or digital copies of things, being available in the future.

Even though we are very tight on space in my home, I always jump at the chance to add a book to my library for a dollar or less, provided that it appears to contain useful information - or to convey a story that teaches a good lesson. In a few cases I've spent $30-70 on a single book I'm not sure when I'll get around to reading (such as books by E. Michael Jones, Fr. Ripperger, and a couple of old books that are out-of-print/hard to find), because they are high-priority on my "to read" list, and I don't want to find myself without access to them in the future if I were to neglect to secure them now.
 

Pray_Everyday

Robin
Woman
Other Christian
I did not even donate them. I dumped them in the trash.

Possible unpopular opinion alert: I have to admit I feel almost personally offended at the idea of someone dumping in the trash something that could have been used by someone else instead of donating. Even if a book is no longer my cup of tea, it may be of use to someone else at this stage in their life. If that person was going to purchase that book anyway, in my opinion it's preferable that they get it second hand at a thrift store or library sale than to keep feeding the beast (Amazon, corporate booksellers, the publishing house, etc).

Then I did it with "American Psycho" by Bret Easton Ellis.
... with possible exceptions like this book. If there is a book that may better belong in the garbage this would be a good candidate. The graphic descriptions of murder, necrophilia, bestiality, torture etc were unnecessary to say the least. We get it - he's psycho, but the details are a bit much.

However, I still donated my copy rather than toss it. Looking back, I really hope no impressionable teen got ahold of it. That's not a donated book problem though, as I bought mine new from a bookstore, while underage.

whether they are human or potentially robot or artificial intelligence or don't forget, even potentially a man that's fibbing at being a woman....this used to be a player forum, its highly likely a lot of female profiles could be lying males.

Or pathological liars, or people with intent to cause mischief or harm...

There is a poster who sometimes posts "advice" or opinions that if followed can result in people having their children taken away by child protective services or worse. I always wonder if the intent is to virtue signal, or cause harm (or get attention). Especially since they don't even follow their own advice...

(Nothing to do with the insinuation made by poster Lights)
Some real ladies have a tomboy brain(hello) so it makes it that much harder to discern, don't give up. Now that I'm baptised and praying more and reading more of God's Word again, I'm successfully being retrained to act submissively and to hold my tongue more often no matter what I'm thinking.
This is very relatable to me, and something I'm working on as well. It's very difficult to hold my (virtual) tongue when something is factually incorrect, however. And I do wonder if it would truly be God's will to hold one's tongue if one has any useful information that others haven't presented yet.
 

Starlight

Kingfisher
Woman
Protestant
If the libraries shutdown (like they already did…), the internet goes down or servers are destroyed, online texts are altered (actually saw that happen), or there is no electricity…
Hardcopy texts are just invaluable, imo.
 

Rob Banks

Pelican
... with possible exceptions like this book. If there is a book that may better belong in the garbage this would be a good candidate. The graphic descriptions of murder, necrophilia, bestiality, torture etc were unnecessary to say the least. We get it - he's psycho, but the details are a bit much.
No, I don't think you do get it.

That (i.e. the disturbing imagery and descriptions) is the whole point.

When I was out of work for a little while a few months ago, out of boredom, I begun watching "Breaking Bad" clips on YouTube. I even thought about purchasing some episodes and watching the show in full.

I quickly realized it was a secular piece of trash. But the other thing I realized were that gruesome depictions of violence were in there on purpose.

The show "Vikings" is another one. I actually did watch that one from season 1. Increasingly, as it went on, there were graphic descriptions not only of violence but of sex as well, up to and including full frontal nudity and a pornographic scene (the latter of which had nothing to do with the plot, by the way. Oh, and he brutally kills her in the very next scene).

I don't really watch TV anymore.

This stuff is not just in there "by accident" or "because the producers don't care."

It's all for a reason. I can't say exactly what that reason is. It has something to do with "conditioning" us to accept that sort of thing. Or something.

But it is not an accident.

---

Also, I don't necessarily believe "freedom of information" is a good thing.

I know many people are likely to say that spread of information is only a good thing, people can decide for themselves what to believe and what not to, etc, etc.

I disagree. People are too easily manipulated. Just look at the world today (with its "high literacy rates" and all).
 

Pray_Everyday

Robin
Woman
Other Christian
No, I don't think you do get it.

I used "we get it" as a figure of speech... referring back to the time I read it, as a high schooler...

That (i.e. the disturbing imagery and descriptions) is the whole point.

When I was out of work for a little while a few months ago, out of boredom, I begun watching "Breaking Bad" clips on YouTube. I even thought about purchasing some episodes and watching the show in full.

I quickly realized it was a secular piece of trash. But the other thing I realized were that gruesome depictions of violence were in there on purpose.
This stuff is not just in there "by accident" or "because the producers don't care."

It's all for a reason. I can't say exactly what that reason is. It has something to do with "conditioning" us to accept that sort of thing. Or something.

But it is not an accident.

Yes, I agree that gratuitous violent and sexual content is placed in media on purpose, whether to demoralize, condition, influence, normalize, subvert or for whatever reason. And whatever that reason may be, it's not a noble one. That doesn't mean my high-school self knew this - not all of us get fully red-pilled as children...

I did say that that book is an example of trash. My high school "friends" and I watched the movie on dvd, which was graphic in itself, and morbid curiosity and immaturity had me decide to read the book. While the movie is something that I have zero interest in rewatching as a Christian, I was attempting to communicate in my previous post that the book was on a whole other level of depravity.

I don't really watch TV anymore.

That's a wise choice. Even seemingly benign (by today's standards) shows from the 90's and early 00's are quite subversive. And the envelope continued to be pushed, thought not as accelerated as today's filth (which I only know about from hearsay, as I don't watch broadcast tv).

Also, I don't necessarily believe "freedom of information" is a good thing.

Where did I say anything about "freedom of information"?

Here's what I said:
It's very difficult to hold my (virtual) tongue when something is factually incorrect, however. And I do wonder if it would truly be God's will to hold one's tongue if one has any useful information that others haven't presented yet.

What I mean by that is if, for example, someone were to advice that it's safe to let children play in busy traffic, and no one else has said otherwise, I would feel like it's necessary to speak up. Or if someone were to constantly talk about the uselessness of the police, and encourages others to defund it, but then calls them when their car is vandalized, I would wonder about that person's motivations.

These are just hypothetical examples - I am not claiming anyone has said the above statements, even though I have to say, sometimes I would not be surprised...

(And honestly, I would prefer to not get into detail with some of the real examples I've seen. There's no way to know who's reading this public forum, and I'd rather not give "them" insights into any weaknesses - which is the primary reason I have not already spoken out and given information regarding some of the ludicrous claims I've read. I can only hope that's the reason others haven't as well.)

I know many people are likely to say that spread of information is only a good thing, people can decide for themselves what to believe and what not to, etc, etc.
I disagree. People are too easily manipulated. Just look at the world today (with its "high literacy rates" and all).

People are too easily manipulated, especially when appeals are made to emotion or groupthink instead of facts. But if there is no dissent allowed it becomes an echo chanber that does, in fact, end up manipulating people.

And I know nothing about how literacy rates are calculated, but I do know many "literate" high school graduates are functionally illiterate and can only recognize words by their shape, often incorrectly, leading to errors in comprehension. Not to mention that identifying the words correctly would not guarantee comprehension. And, even then, it's not just a matter of reading words but also understanding statistics, biases, special interests who are behind the material being read, etc. It is true that this is beyond many people's heads.

That doesn't mean that just because some people may be easily manipulated, on a public forum factual truth shouldn't be shared (preferably with links and data so those that are not "easily manipulated" can see it for themselves).
 

Rob Banks

Pelican
I used "we get it" as a figure of speech... referring back to the time I read it, as a high schooler...



Yes, I agree that gratuitous violent and sexual content is placed in media on purpose, whether to demoralize, condition, influence, normalize, subvert or for whatever reason. And whatever that reason may be, it's not a noble one. That doesn't mean my high-school self knew this - not all of us get fully red-pilled as children...

I did say that that book is an example of trash. My high school "friends" and I watched the movie on dvd, which was graphic in itself, and morbid curiosity and immaturity had me decide to read the book. While the movie is something that I have zero interest in rewatching as a Christian, I was attempting to communicate in my previous post that the book was on a whole other level of depravity.



That's a wise choice. Even seemingly benign (by today's standards) shows from the 90's and early 00's are quite subversive. And the envelope continued to be pushed, thought not as accelerated as today's filth (which I only know about from hearsay, as I don't watch broadcast tv).



Where did I say anything about "freedom of information"?

Here's what I said:


What I mean by that is if, for example, someone were to advice that it's safe to let children play in busy traffic, and no one else has said otherwise, I would feel like it's necessary to speak up. Or if someone were to constantly talk about the uselessness of the police, and encourages others to defund it, but then calls them when their car is vandalized, I would wonder about that person's motivations.

These are just hypothetical examples - I am not claiming anyone has said the above statements, even though I have to say, sometimes I would not be surprised...

(And honestly, I would prefer to not get into detail with some of the real examples I've seen. There's no way to know who's reading this public forum, and I'd rather not give "them" insights into any weaknesses - which is the primary reason I have not already spoken out and given information regarding some of the ludicrous claims I've read. I can only hope that's the reason others haven't as well.)



People are too easily manipulated, especially when appeals are made to emotion or groupthink instead of facts. But if there is no dissent allowed it becomes an echo chanber that does, in fact, end up manipulating people.

And I know nothing about how literacy rates are calculated, but I do know many "literate" high school graduates are functionally illiterate and can only recognize words by their shape, often incorrectly, leading to errors in comprehension. Not to mention that identifying the words correctly would not guarantee comprehension. And, even then, it's not just a matter of reading words but also understanding statistics, biases, special interests who are behind the material being read, etc. It is true that this is beyond many people's heads.

That doesn't mean that just because some people may be easily manipulated, on a public forum factual truth shouldn't be shared (preferably with links and data so those that are not "easily manipulated" can see it for themselves).
OK, I guess I came off a certain way with my "no I don't think you do get it" comment at the beginning.

I kind of realized that and then decided to leave it anyway. I don't know why.

My comment was not meant as a criticism of anything you said, really, it was also meant as sort of a "figure of speech" to show how bad this stuff truly is.

That's my fault for sure.
 

Rob Banks

Pelican
People are too easily manipulated, especially when appeals are made to emotion or groupthink instead of facts. But if there is no dissent allowed it becomes an echo chanber that does, in fact, end up manipulating people.

And I know nothing about how literacy rates are calculated, but I do know many "literate" high school graduates are functionally illiterate and can only recognize words by their shape, often incorrectly, leading to errors in comprehension. Not to mention that identifying the words correctly would not guarantee comprehension. And, even then, it's not just a matter of reading words but also understanding statistics, biases, special interests who are behind the material being read, etc. It is true that this is beyond many people's heads.

That doesn't mean that just because some people may be easily manipulated, on a public forum factual truth shouldn't be shared (preferably with links and data so those that are not "easily manipulated" can see it for themselves).
I don't really agree with this. I don't think it's "only some people."

This includes me, by the way. I was manipulated into believing atheism, libertarianism, I even believed "good" and "evil" did not exist. I actually remember arguing that to my high school friends.

The masses have been manipulated by the media ever since the invention of the printing press.

In fact, I believe that was low-key the whole point (or at least the main point) of the printing press and subsequent media inventions.
 

christie2

Robin
Woman
Orthodox
There was a brief stage of my life I was labelled. It was when I was 12 going on 13, right before first menses.(sorry for tmi, but its significant because after that life event, I rebelled against the labelling)
Because I was defined as advanced, along with another mature girl my age, we were tasked with creating a school newspaper.
It was terrible.

To have to constantly come up with news items and info to teach others...it ended up being a great lesson for me in the ways the media workers manipulate us.

When there's no news, you create news out of thin air.

I retreated into myself after this and tried to hide any consciousness I had, if that makes sense. If people label you as advanced, they task you with jobs that apparently 'lead' others but really, you're just expected to manipulate for entertainment.

Reading through this thread made me think of this and I wanted to share this memory.
 

Pray_Everyday

Robin
Woman
Other Christian
OK, I guess I came off a certain way with my "no I don't think you do get it" comment at the beginning.

I kind of realized that and then decided to leave it anyway. I don't know why.

My comment was not meant as a criticism of anything you said, really, it was also meant as sort of a "figure of speech" to show how bad this stuff truly is.

That's my fault for sure.

No worries!

I don't really agree with this. I don't think it's "only some people."

This includes me, by the way. I was manipulated into believing atheism, libertarianism, I even believed "good" and "evil" did not exist. I actually remember arguing that to my high school friends.

That was me as well. Atheism and libertarianism were my worldview for quite some time.

I wouldn't say I'm the last person my back-then self would have expected to ever be a Christian, but one of the last for sure. However, just as how (faulty) information - lies, really - led me to believe atheism and libertarianism, so did information lead me to our Lord Jesus Christ. My faith came through information, and in a way, logic. God, in his infinite wisdom, had me be born during this "information age", as who knows how my rebellious nature would have fared in ages past. Every day I thank the Lord for his mercy, in that I didn't die before coming to Him.

The masses have been manipulated by the media ever since the invention of the printing press.

In fact, I believe that was low-key the whole point (or at least the main point) of the printing press

I disagree, and believe that God is in control.

and subsequent media inventions.

Yeah, we could probably do without these (but easy for me to say, as I prefer the written media). For sure I'd say that television was probably invented solely to manipulate the masses. But since reading is not completely passive as tv/video viewing, I think it leads to the reader being able to stop and question everything in a way that's not possible with tv/video viewing. Could just be my opinion though, as I admittedly love books.

Apologies if this has gottten into threadjack territory!
 

Rob Banks

Pelican
No worries!



That was me as well. Atheism and libertarianism were my worldview for quite some time.

I wouldn't say I'm the last person my back-then self would have expected to ever be a Christian, but one of the last for sure. However, just as how (faulty) information - lies, really - led me to believe atheism and libertarianism, so did information lead me to our Lord Jesus Christ. My faith came through information, and in a way, logic. God, in his infinite wisdom, had me be born during this "information age", as who knows how my rebellious nature would have fared in ages past. Every day I thank the Lord for his mercy, in that I didn't die before coming to Him.



I disagree, and believe that God is in control.



Yeah, we could probably do without these (but easy for me to say, as I prefer the written media). For sure I'd say that television was probably invented solely to manipulate the masses. But since reading is not completely passive as tv/video viewing, I think it leads to the reader being able to stop and question everything in a way that's not possible with tv/video viewing. Could just be my opinion though, as I admittedly love books.

Apologies if this has gottten into threadjack territory!
I will post this link. It is a blog post by a former forum member.

Give it a read. It may just change your "view" of things.
 
Top