• philthi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Ok, I can agree with this logic “it’s better to try than to give in” much more than “there’s always a solution”.

    That to me still leaves some people starving of hunger due to a lack of money and an excess of bills. But I agree that even in that horrible situation it’s better to keep trying than give in.

    I was worried the argument here was closer to “you’re in this terrible situation because you didn’t try enough” which I wholeheartedly disagree with.

    I feel now that we’re in agreement though?

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      If there’s no solution, there’s no point in trying, so you need to believe there’s always a solution. Maybe there’s no apparent solution, but with some effort one can be discovered.

      some people starving

      And if they do nothing, they will continue to starve. If they try something, maybe they won’t. Some options:

      • apply for government assistance, if available
      • apply for additional jobs
      • scavenge
      • sell things to buy food
      • change other spending habits
      • steal
      • commit a crime bad enough to go to jail (prisoners get fed)

      Each of those has difference costs, chances of success, and chances of making your situation worse. You know what you’ll get if you do nothing, so it’s probably better to try something.

      in agreement

      IDK, my goal in online discussions isn’t to reach agreement, but to fully explain my side and understand the other person’s side. Maybe I’ll convince them, maybe they’ll convince me, but either way, the discussion should provide value for the next person who comes along and reads it.