r/DeepThoughts

People overthink every little thing because they’re constantly worried about how others see them. It’s like no one is just being anymore everyone is performing. And the worst part is how casually people are rude about it. Like comments about someone’s body, their habits, their personality as if it’s normal to pick people apart. I have a friend with a completely normal body but she’s started starving herself eating once a day just because some people made comments about her weight. And it’s scary how something said so casually can affect someone that deeply. I don’t know it just feels like we’ve created this environment where everyone is insecure and also contributing to making others insecure at the same time.

I have been force fed Christianity since I was a teenager and if we assume that God created everything he created the laws of physics, laws of mathematics, billions of stars planets and galaxies which are billions of light years across. Why couldn’t such a genius of mathematics have came up with a better way to forgive our sins that didn’t involve sending himself down to a random planet orbiting a random star, having himself tortured and executed so that he can forgive himself.

I’ve noticed something weird at work: two people can follow the same rules and put in the same effort, but end up with completely different results. One gets support, time to think, and a chance to make mistakes. The other deals with constant pressure, tight deadlines, and no backup.

Lately, I’ve been feeling stuck, and it’s made me realize that hard work isn’t everything. The people around you and the environment you’re in matter just as much. Maybe it’s not about working harder, it’s about finding the right place and the right people to have your back.

It is not a surprise the gap between poor and wealthy is rising rapidly, but I never understood fully what it meant, before I saw articles about K shaped economy.

What it means is that majority of working class and lower middle class people started to think of McDonalds or economy plane tickets as a luxury. Demand for goods targeted towards regular people is dropping, while at the same time demand for actual luxury goods is rising. My argument is that this gap is more dangerous today, than it would be if it happened 50 years ago.

I am not pro socialism nor pro capitalism myself, but it deeply annoys me some people refuse to see the dangers current form of capitalistic society in this day and age poses. Everyone is talking of the symptoms that we see right now, but not the implications of what can happen in the future. It is because there is little talks of the whole picture - capitalism, social media, AI technology, nationalism, societal trends, class war, mental health crisis and the least talked about - social engineering.

Not one of those things is inherently backwards or malicious on its own, they are like nuclear weapons - they each have reasons to exist such as security, creating profits, technological advancement. However, just like nukes they can be pretty detrimental in wrong hands and in the wrong system.

Why does it matter in case of wealth gap? When lower classes, which is majority of people, now deem stuff they previously had access to as outside of their pay bracket and upper class hoards wealth by resorting to law breaking and nepotism, it stops sounding like liberal democratic capitalism. My theory is that now we are at a turning point in history, where society we know is changing too fast to keep up.

- AI trend is locking people out of office jobs, and as much as it is not good yet, it is on its way to be rapidly improved at any cost by being pushed by most big CEOs on the planet.

- The trade off is that workforce can move towards government sector, teaching, healthcare, military or manual labour. The problem is that those salaries rarely compare to private sector and job itself is psychologically more demanding, moreover for a lot of people it requires additional training, which cost money. If most start ups failed in the past, now it is borderline impossible for regular person to build medium and bigger businesses.

- Mental health paranoia is at its height and as much as a lot of it is valid, social media and amount of information is overwhelming and therapy is unrealistic option for most people. So what happens is that people relive their trauma through internet bringing attention to it, it strips them of ability to cope the way they used to, but turns out focusing on therapy and self improvement is off the table for financial reasons. It creates bitter society, that believes they are hurt. Paradoxically raising mental health awareness is what got us there.

- Social media and popular language models are addictive by design and the whole industry spends billions to find out best ways to keep people addicted, ways to manipulate different target groups, ways to extract information and more. But the misconception is that this research only serves gaining more profit and keeping consumer base engaged. In reality this research is often used in different fields, especially politics, military and intelligence. I could go on for hours about how many concerning applications the social engineering knowledge has and how little regular people can do about it.

- Upper class has demonstrated concerning ideological tendencies. Increasing economic gap in the society means in the future they can get away with more.

You may think that the points I raised have nothing to do with capitalism, but I believe they are both a result and future of it. I ask you to think about what happens when an average person can no longer afford a plane ticket, what happens when free travel, service industry, legal help and more become exclusively available to 1% of people.

My theory is that lower classes due to being prone to addiction, disappointment and lack of other amenities will become increasingly reliant on social media. Their psychological pain reinforced by ‚mental health awareness’ makes them susceptible to all kind of social engineering and suggestions. Economic constraints, shame of not working hard enough and lose of wealth will trap individuals in harmful patterns and environments.

I remain optimistic that it will not be dystopian, but at the same time historical parallels teach us that empires fall, states adopt harmful ideologies and humans yearn to be controlled.

The way I see it, women were in subordinate roles across the globe for all of premodern history because it made economic sense in agricultural societies.

Before the advent of capitalism and industry, food came out of the ground. Children were needed to get that food and most children died before reaching maturity so people had lots of kids. Lots of kids means lots of pregnancy which equals a handicap to women’s health and autonomy.

Today food comes from stores. You buy it with money that you get from going to jobs. More kids = less money because you have to feed your kids by spending money.

Plus technology and medicine have advanced to point where most kids who are born don’t die.

It has stopped making sense to have lots of kids. Women don’t have to be pregnant all the time. They are free to make their own choices.

There is a lot of nuance I have left out but this is the broad trajectory of the development of social dynamics related to gender and sexuality.

My dad called me Friday and told me that my aunt who lives out of town in (MS) husband died. This was sad news although I’d only met him a few times but it wasn’t just a heart attack or her was home with family. No. He was riding his motorcycle at night when a car ran a red light, hit him, and kept driving. This was a hit and run killing. They are still trying to locate the guy but not my aunt has to plan a funeral for her husband of only like 10 years. I’m 20 and even now I can’t imagine the feeling, going on Facebook it’s just all over. Their church, family members and friends giving condolences, and pictures of his face.

This is the second family member I’ve lost to a motorcycle and it’s always been from careless drivers. I haven’t spoken to my aunt but I know she has the funeral set for this Saturday. I cant go because of school and work but I feel like messaging a “im so sorry for your loss” or “my condolences” seems so unfitting. Like that the wrong thing or doesn’t fit correctly. No one or their comments can bring her husband back. I don’t think that would make me feel better but I’m wondering if I should still send it. My aunt and I don’t speak often but she’s still my aunt and this is a tragic loss.

Am I overthinking this?

I have always pondered why death «hurts» so much? Not just the physical part, but the visceral, existential terror of it.

The standard answer is always Darwinism: «We evolved to fear death so we’d survive long enough to breed.» If we’re just biological machines meant to pass on DNA, our internal lives are massively over-engineered. You don’t need a deep sense of awe, high sensitivity to beauty, or the ability to ponder the «meaning of life» just to gather berries and avoid a predator.

Everything in the universe is there for a reason, no matter how insignificant it might seem, it ended up there for a reason and a purpose. Humans have been shaped with multiple different personalities, ways of sensing things, different ways of understanding/creating/loving/hating etc.. Suddenly it starts looking like there’s a framework or a «system» in place. And a framework can’t exist without a purpose, so the question is - what’s the purpose?

Well after some reflection I have landed on a conclusion. I think we are what you could call experimental units or observers of the universe. If the universe is just raw matter and energy, it doesn’t «know» it exists. A star doesn't appreciate its own heat. I think consciousness was produced so the universe could finally look back at itself and understand what it actually is. We’re the sensors.

In this system, our task isn't to be successful in a human sense, but it’s to provide unique data points to the universe or the creator. Think about it. Humanity have been learning and creating stuff on the planet all this time for what? Well, it’s main purpose is so we can understand ourselves, and since we are the embodiment of the universe we are helping the universe understand itself. Are you following?

This is why we have such different drives. Some people care deeply about a specific goal, whether it's a career, a creative project, or a way of living that others might find totally irrelevant. That «care» isn't an accident. Those specific obsessions produce the unique data points the universe wants. When you pursue a goal with everything you have, you are providing a perspective that no one else in the history of the system has provided. The universe wants that specific result, and pushes you towards it - also called manifestation.

If all of this I’m saying is true, then the «life flashing before your eyes» moment at the end fits in. It’s the moment the person uploads everything it witnessed, achieved, and struggled for back into the source. The hurt and the fear of death are just in place to make sure we don't quit before we finish what we were set out to do.

This theory also gives dreams purpose, because they could be in place to accurately store memory from the day and help the process of conserving data. But wait, animals also dream - which would mean they also gather data, right? Correct. But not the same data type as us humans. Animals are in place to collect other parts of data us humans would never think of collecting, and they also make the operation of the earth possible and sustainable.

Any flaws in this theory? I endorse criticism or/and skepticism.

Die Diagnose „Borderline“

ist für viele ein schwerer Stempel,

der oft mehr verletzt, als dass er hilft.

Oft fühlt es sich an,

als würden wir in vorgefertigte Schubladen gesteckt werden,

ohne dass jemand wirklich hinhört,

was in uns vorgeht.

Menschen mit dieser Diagnose

werden häufig missverstanden,

stigmatisiert und abgetan,

als wären sie nur ihre Symptome.

Dabei ist da so viel mehr dahinter:

Geschichten von Schmerz,

von Verletzlichkeit,

aber auch von unglaublicher Kraft und Hoffnung.

Hinter jeder Diagnose steckt ein Mensch,

der gesehen,

gehört und verstanden werden möchte.

They are not exciting people, however much cinema tries to perfume them. They are usually ordinary cowards with a talent for upholstery, forever covering rot with fabric. A thief at least admits his profession through action. A cheater wants the medal of loyalty and the pleasure of betrayal in the same pocket. That is what makes them spiritually shabby. They do not sin with courage. They sin with stationery, with screenshots deleted in panic, with phones tilted face down on tables like guilty little coffins.

The world often mistakes them for charming because society has always been vulnerable to polished fraud. A smooth sentence, a wounded childhood, a rehearsed sigh, and suddenly the bastard is treated like a misunderstood poet instead of what he is, a clerk of deceit doing overtime in the dark. Cheaters survive on one ancient business model. Promise one person a temple, sneak into another person’s tent, then call the whole circus complicated. Nothing is complicated. Their appetite is larger than their character, and their character was already malnourished.

What makes them grotesque is not desire. Desire is human. It walks, stumbles, sweats. The corruption begins when deceit becomes method, when lying turns into routine, when another person’s trust is handled like disposable cutlery after a cheap meal. That is when the soul starts smelling foul.

Sooner or later, every cheater becomes a museum of excuses, standing under poor lighting, explaining why their filth was fate. You let them speak because trash always produces gas before it settles.

we all know we are not the things that externally resemble us, right?

you don't feel less Lucy or John as your personality, mental state, look, status (social, financial, academic, legal, etc) and many other stuff change about you.

we do identify ourselves through many of them, but we never feel that we ARE those things. there's something inside you that feels... you. no matter how much you change, you know you are the same entity behind it all. you feel that those things are just tools to represent/define your self. not your actual self.

yet, these are precisely the only things people can love you through. because they simply can't access that "you" essence that only you can feel about yourself.

some people will be shallow and love you for how pretty you look as a girl or handsome as a man. or for your social status like being the popular girl in school or the charismatic guy all the teachers and other students know.

some will even be deep and love you for your views/beliefs or personality/character/mindset or for the way you treat them or for the history and good time you represent to them.

but nobody can access the "you" deep within your soul. the constant, one-and-only, deeply embedded, unchangeable you. only your ever-changing external you.

what we really ache for in life is very basic. food. water. safety. sex. these are raw needs. powerful enough to make a human selfish. powerful enough to destroy order if left unchecked. if hunger had no boundary we would eat each other. if desire had no restraint we would violate each other.

so human beings created something higher. values. manners. systems. not to kill these needs but to soften them. to make coexistence possible. to make sure we live together without destroying each other.

but here is the catch. while doing this the system did not just guide expression. it slowly started shaping identity.

there is a right way to speak. a right way to laugh. a right way to love. a right way to behave. dont shout. dont sit like that. dont say this. dont feel that. and slowly we learn to edit ourselves.

we are not forced. we are rewarded.

the polished version of you is accepted. the controlled version is praised. the raw version is rejected. so you adapt. you soften. you bend. and over time you forget what was real.

this creates an apologetic person. someone who exists with hesitation. someone who expresses with permission. and when many such people come together we get a society that praises authenticity but does not tolerate it.

we all say be yourself. but when someone actually is we feel uncomfortable.

now think about a partner in this context.

a true partner is not someone who just supports your chaos. and not someone who constantly corrects you. both are incomplete.

a true partner is someone who can sit with your raw self without trying to fix it. without trying to run away from it. someone who does not make you feel the need to explain yourself all the time.

they allow your weirdness. your quirks. your strange parts. but they are not blind either. they do not justify your harmful sides. they are present. aware. steady.

because removing all boundaries is not freedom. it is just collision.

what we really want is not chaos. it is a space where we are not afraid of being rejected.

a space where you dont have to perform. where you dont have to hide. where you dont feel watched or measured all the time.

most people dont live in their swabhav. they live in abhav or prabhav. either in lack or in conditioning.

a partner cannot give you your true nature. but they can create a space where you are not afraid to return to it.

and if you ever find that kind of space it feels rare. it feels like home.

but one thing is important.

you dont need someone to complete you.

you need someone with whom you dont feel the need to incomplete yourself.

and maybe that is what we were always searching for. not freedom from the world. but freedom from the constant need to edit ourselves in front of it. not someone who changes us. not someone who saves us. but someone in whose presence nothing inside us feels illegal anymore. not because everything is perfect. but because everything is finally allowed to be seen.

And you have to step back at some point and ask

If everything you do is set up to burn

Is it really a foundation?

I've been taking a philosophy course and the main focus has been "what is good" and i think Ive made my mind up on it but i want to hear what others have to say about it. so if u don't mind sharing, please do!

If we look at relationship behavior over time, patterns become visible, the same triggers producing the same reactions across different situations.

Attachment theory suggests these reactions are not random but structured responses, and some approaches like those taught in Personal Development School focus on gradually shifting these responses through repetition and awareness.

If patterns are learned, and learning can be updated, then it raises a question, are relationship outcomes less about compatibility and more about the patterns each person brings into the interaction?

We’re constantly told to optimize everything our time, habits, careers, even our thoughts. But somewhere along the way, “being productive” quietly replaced “being fulfilled.”

We follow routines, chase goals, and measure success using metrics we didn’t create… without ever pausing to ask why.

>This post explores a simple but uncomfortable question:
If you stripped away expectations, social pressure, and the need to impress what would you actually choose to do with your life?

Is productivity making us better, or just keeping us busy enough to avoid that question?

Curious to hear how others think about this.

So I recently read a book (AGGGTM 3) in which the main character killed someone to "break the circle". Is it justifiable for someone to kill a murderer? More importantly, is it the best choice you have?

Imagine this: Someone takes your most valued person in your life. They kill them. Obviously, you are enraged. You want to kill them. If you know there isn't enough evidence to convict them, but you're sure it was them that did this, is your best choice to kill them?

Generally, in which cases is murder more ok?

At the very least

I know I’ve experienced a lot of disingenuous emergent behaviors

I’ve noticed a few children that have been taught that to be respectful you should speak when spoken to, help others in need and to be a “good” obedient child, but the impact it has on social skills is massive.

How else is a child supposed to stand up for what they believe is right, if they’re not used to using their voice to confront people. It also leads to being taken advantage of as they prioritise helping others without healthy boundaries which can cause more harm than good.