₦airaland Forum

Kobojunkie:
According to research, most rape victims never really recover from the experience as they are haunted for the rest of their lives by the experience. With that in mind, does simply having the ability to embark on this supposed "journey of healing" really amount to much when compared to that lost as a result of the trauma?

2. A murder victim has no more journeys to embark on and no more cares. He is dead because his life was unjustly taken from him, sought of like the traumatic experience rape victims are subjected to at the point of their rape.

Since many rape victims "never really recover" from rape, and are "haunted for life", could an argument be made that some rape survivors would have been better off murdered than rape?

If the answer is yes, how do we possibly justify making that heavy judgment on anyone's behalf, apart from their own?

airmark:
Lemme quote you so that Oasisx will see it.

😂

triplechoice:
At the beginning,I phrased my words accordingly with the word, most, in answering to the op. I said, most people in the past, the ancients, as compared to people of today , operated from low level of consciousness based on what they did, said and believed.


The only mistake was using ,most, instead of more for people of today. More people, unlike in the past, are operating from a higher level of consciousness, but most aren't.

Do you agree to that?

I can agree with you that more people today have the capacity to access more information and perspectives compared to the older days. As for whether this fact is indicative of a "higher consciousness" as opposed to people just having different kinds of understanding, I'm not sure I can make any confident statement there unless you can define what you mean by "consciousness".

triplechoice:
I mistakenly created a misunderstanding by using the wrong word, " most" instead of more.

I used the qualifier, most, in responding to the op and continued with that when I had to respond to your question about people of today having the ability to think independently or operating from a more higher state of consciousness

If you accept there's no much difference between the use of both qualifiers, most and more, I will provide the evidence for my claim.

That's, do you agree that more people are now able to think independently as compared to most people of the ancient past?

There's a very big difference actually. The word "most" makes your claim sound more absolute. If you're trying to convey a proportional shift in collective thoughts across history, "more" sounds like the better operative word.

I'm fine with the rest of your arguments. Like I told you earlier, I don't have an issue with your core argument. It's just how you were phrasing your words.

Edited for clarity.

triplechoice:
Please can you show me where I used the word, accurately ,or even suggested anything close to what you accusing me of?
oh my God. Your misrepresenting me.

I made a comparison and said today is different unlike in the past. A lot of people these days are able to think independently no matter what group they belong.

I never said people of today are completely immune from external influences in their environment.

You trying to make me accept what you're wrongly making from my responses to you.


Please try not forget the key word, "most" in your next reply.

You continue to ignore it hence the reason you asked the above begining with,"we"

I was specific about what I explained.

Fair enough. Let me rephrase my question then.

What is the evidence to suggest that "most people" today think more independently today than "most people" did in the past?

triplechoice:
. 1. If it's not correct that people's behaviour are influenced by their thinking or their predominant thoughts, then tell me, what's influencing it?. Action springing from thoughts has been confirmed to be correct by modern cognitive science . It's the reason we now understand how neural pathways in the brain ,which encodes concentrated thought patterns , control our behaviour unconsciously.,

Have you not observed that certain group of people behave in a particular way without being consciously aware of how they're behaving almost exactly the same?


2. A little Google search will inform you of the prevailing thoughts currently influencing the behaviour of most people today. However, it's not easy to determine that easily because these days ,unlike in the past, most people are now free to think independently.

In the past, before the coming of modern science, the prevailing thoughts were those of superstition. Most people had superstitious thoughts of different kinds which influenced what they did and said.


What "our future generations" will know about the human being and the world we live in which will currently don't know is what help them to easily identify our"blind spots"

Despite our unprecedented access to information, we still don't know it all.

Our behavior is as a result of our thought patterns, I know that already. I'm not dragging that with you. What I'm highly skeptical about is the idea that the "consciousness level" of an entire historical population can be accurately assessed or measured. That's what I was more interested in.

You obviously know how to string up a solid argument, but you don't seem to be aware of the blind spots in them, like the hidden assumption in this statement you made:

unlike in the past, most people are now free to think independently

You are implying that our present generation is somehow less influenced by collective thought patterns than our ancestors, and I'm not sure what to make of that because according to modern research in fields like psychology and sociology, we are still very much susceptible to unconscious biases. A very perfect example is the internet and social media as a whole. YouTube algorithms are literally designed to create a bubble around users wherein they only interact with ideas molded around their biases.

We're still susceptible to bias in the workplace, in churches, schools, etc. whether we realize it or not.

Is there really any evidence that shows that we are more free to think independently than our ancestors? Isn't it safer or more plausible to assume that we're operating under different forms of social or cognitive influence?

From cabal to higher cabal.

HigherEd:
The problem with Nigeria is that too many people are doing what they shouldn't be doing. That's why we are not moving forward.
The people that should be the next Soyinka or Chinua Achebe are wasting away in a medical school somewhere.

Our society is too streamlined by defining brilliance by academics. Personally, I don't believe anybody is brilliant. I only believe people are brilliant at what they were intended to do. So I know that when you fail at something you have no interest at, it could mean that you were doing something you weren't made to do...

Einstein is a brilliant scientist but he can never be as brilliant as Messi on the field of football. To each its own, the bird flies, the fish swims. Each does what they are meant to do with dexterity.

I repeat there is no dull person anywhere. If you are failing it is either you are doing it wrongly, not diligent enough or was never meant to do it in the first place. Just find your craft and master it and you won't have to have unexpected ejacs

You've perfectly summed up why our educational system leaves much to be desired. 👍🏽

frugal:

Na hahn be this? 👀

tokaiki:
JAMB is correct.

Oga you quoted the wrong phrase. 🤦🏽

The phrase Henshaw was referencing is "while verification and other clearance processes BEGINS."

It is well with this country. Lol.

ExAngel007:
https://alexis.lindaikejisblog.com/photos/shares/20250428_210308_1745870621.jpg

Kate Henshaw has corrected the Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB) over a grammatical error on X.


The examination board made the mistake while responding to politician Peter Obi's claim that young admissions seeker were made to leave home in the dark to write the university entrance exams as early as 6:00am.


Responding via its official X account, JAMB wrote partly : "@PeterObi, Your Excellency,
I must assert that our examination is scheduled to commence at 8:00am, not 6:00 am. While verification and other clearance processes begins at 6:30am , it is imperative that candidates are afforded adequate time to settle in before the exam begins."

https://alexis.lindaikejisblog.com/photos/shares/Screenshot_20250428_204336_X_1745870455.jpg

Kate Henshaw then corrected JAMB, writing: By the way @JAMBHQ


It's not 'while verification and other clearance processes BEGINS'


It is 'while verification and other clearance processes BEGIN!!' I had all my education in this country. It was never this bad.."

https://alexis.lindaikejisblog.com/photos/shares/Screenshot_20250428_204346_X_1745870494.jpg

https://www.lindaikejisblog.com/2025/4/kate-henshaw-corrects-jamb-after-the-examination-board-made-a-grammatical-error.html

Choi!! 😭😭😭

Education in this country is at rock bottom. 🤦🏽

semid4lyfe:
Unblocked.

🙌🏽

semid4lyfe:
He's doing too much to prove loyalty to the president after the Obasa impeachment issue

Senior man abeg look into my hidden post. Thanks.

Melvyn11:
They lose regularly to Leopards because they are lazy and not as strong as they are perceived. They are herbivores with big muscles and zero fighting skills or technique. Some bulldogs go fit even beat them 1 vs 1 self talkless of ten humans.

This is hilariously inaccurate.

Silverback gorillas can lift over a thousand pounds, and their bite force is estimated at 1,300 PSI. Leopard's bite force is 1,000 PSI. If a silverback gorilla is bloodlusted, ten humans can NOT stand it down, talk less of a bulldog. Research is free abeg, make we no dey blow lies because of argument.

https://untamedanimals.com/gorilla-vs-leopard/?citationMarker=43dcd9a7-70db-4a1f-b0ae-981daa162054

Leopards can only get an upper hand over gorillas with the element of surprise. Face to face, an average leopard is outmatched by an average gorilla.

triplechoice:
I didn't say everyone back then was gullible. If you read my response to DeepSight, I dwelt on the "most" the public, who weren't as knowledgeable as the few, (religious leaders and philosophers) who had access to higher knowledge with which they used to guide or control everyone else.

And that has not changed. The public, the average human being doesn't know much about what he or she is and the world he or she is currently occupying.

Only a few persons really know, but unwilling to reveal all they know. Sometimes, those who really know, even deliberately suppress the truth for their own benefit. It's happening in religion and even in the sciences.

As for the word consciousness, I have used it they way that's appropriate for the ongoing discussion.

The word, consciousness is not easily defined as it means different things to different people

In the context of the ongoing discussion, consciousness as I have used it refers to prevailing thoughts which controls the behaviour of a group of people at any given time.

In the past, what were the prevailing thoughts amongst most people?

If you could figure that out through research, then, it would be easy to know the level of consciousness from which people of those days were operating from as compared to ours.

Let us grant your collective consciousness theory and assume it is correct.

My question is, if it is correct, I'm interested to know what you think are the prevailing thoughts that are controlling all behaviors in our current era.

And what are those blind spots that our future generations might identify in our thinking despite the access to information we have today, which is unprecedented in human history?

If this pattern of consciousness evolution is universal, what are those things we are currently unable to see about ourselves today that will probably be obvious to humans a thousand years from now?

SeeAllen:
Tinubu will be a one term President except Nigerians have become goats

You might seriously be underestimating our stupidity in this beloved country.

semid4lyfe:
Spambot exempts all moderators. They can use words other members cannot.

If you quote a moderator:s post containing words that triggers the spambot, you'll be banned.

Chai. See enjoyment from privileges. 🤧

SmallDick99:
How can someone with a brain even compare the both?

Nawa oh

You wey get brain oya tell us why they shouldn't be compared.

triplechoice:
The collective consciousness of a group of people is always reflected in the things they do and say.

And what a group of people do and say is based on the knowledge that they possess.

Most people of the past, compared to "people of today" didn't have much knowledge of themselves and the world, and it reflected in their behaviour.

In a thousand years from now, those coming after us would also make the same comparison I made and refer to us as savages.

You're not entirely wrong. I just have an issue with your choice of words.

I don't think "consciousness" is a very good term to describe our collective access to knowledge as humans. You might want to write it off as a matter of semantics but words have meanings, and using that word "consciousness" the way you're doing makes it sound loaded and not really clear.

You're right that our knowledge is expanding. Over time we learn new things that make previous knowledge look inferior or painfully primitive. But that doesn't mean people back then were more gullible than us. It just means they were operating within an outdated ecosystem of knowledge, if that makes sense.

I mean, we literally had ancient philosophers and skeptics who questioned popularly held beliefs. So that fact alone debunks any suggestion that people back then were more gullible.

semid4lyfe:
It doesn't even make sense to block anyone here cos the difference and plurality of opinions is what drives this thread.

If person post here dey affect your mental health, then you're immature and have a lot of growing up to do.

True, but it depends on the kind of posts though. I don't see anything wrong in blocking posts from obvious trolls.

Blocking people for having a different opinion is something else sha. And there's a good argument for being immature in that case.

Personally if the stupidity from a moniker is more intense than I expected, I just read and ignore because I've found that on rare occasions, I can learn something from even the most infantile trolls. A broken clock is right twice a day after all.

osazsky:
When u rape someone u have murdered d person psycologically

But rape victims can embark on a journey of healing to overcome trauma and experience small moments of joy.

A victim of murder cannot enjoy such privileges.

What say you?

Na me be OP, by the way.

Kobojunkie:
A game specifically for men, since I don't see women engaging at all -- to force women(and maybe girls too) into nonconsensual rape? And you think this is a broad debate about the ethics of rape vs murder?

I'll start with the specific concerns you highlighted:

1. Yes, the game is clearly marketed towards disturbed young men.

2. Yes it IS a broad debate about the ethics of rape vs murder dating back to Kant, Mill and so on and so forth.

If you're not comfortable with such topics, then it's fine. But that's the nature of most philosophical inquiries. You're talking as if I'm defending the game. I only brought it up as an illustration. The game sounds absolutely reprehensible to me, and I have no interest in defending it. I'm only interested in the consistency of the human's moral intuitions. Why do we instinctively consider some violations more heinous than others?

Recently, a game titled "No Mercy" came out on Steam. Long story short, the goal of the game is to force women into non-consensual intercourse.

The game was eventually removed from the platform after 50,000 signatures to a petition demanding it to be removed.

Users from sites like 4chan didn't take kindly to this and called out the hypocrisy of the gaming industry for celebrating games like Grand Theft Auto where innocent civilians can be killed recklessly without any reason. And this made me to ponder on the ethics of rape and what makes it so vile compared to murder. I have my opinions on the subject but I'll like to hear what others think first.

It's an age old debate, but I really just want to pick people's brains here and understand their rationale for moral judgements.

So in your view, which do you think is worse? Rape or murder?

And why?

Nice one Seun.

Although I'd suggest that full control over the time period of blocking be granted to the user. Some of us might want to block others permanently.

triplechoice:
I don't think most of would have found it ridiculous if we were alive then.

The consciousness of most people, the public, during those times, as compared to now was very low, making it easy for them to believe anything.

What does this statement really mean though?

How do we objectively measure the "consciousness" of people back then and juxtapose it with the "consciousness" of people today?

K

greenbrave:
Hello fam.

I was dating this girl, I really love her so much. She has my quality and all.

But recently, she BROKE up with me. Due to my own fault, yes it's me. I wasn't romantic and don't listen to her.

Now, this is just 3 day back. I can't seem to. hold myself.


I just want to know if it's okay to talk to. her about it.

Talk to her say wetin happen?

That ship has sailed bro. Move on.

Religion and delusions of grandeur are 5 and 6. Nothing too surprising here.

In my experience, a healthy number of religious people are often megalomanics and/or straight up narcissists.

Chucks13:
Dey play ok. You are a Lagosian and you won't vote for Tinubu, yea that is your choice and right and myself I'm not Lagosian neither from SW but I was born in SW and I will forever support anything SW because SW was the only region that accepted our parents from SE after the civil war and I will forever appreciate that and grateful to their kindness so I'm voting Tinubu again and again I'm not an ingrate SW made my parent and majority of my friends are from SW in a nutshell I love them exceedingly regardless Tinubu policies, seriously I'm not bothered a bit.

Thanks for being a Lagosian and standing against your own people I wish you the very best, however, Tinubu is your president till 2031 take that to bank.

Such a stupid reason to pledge allegiance.

If this is the kind of logic we still rely on in this day and age, then Nigeria has no future. What is the guarantee that this country won't collapse to complete irreversible ruins in years to come with people like you at the helm?

Bobloco:
This is the mistake most of you are making:

2027 isn’t about any region’s turn. Right now, the overwhelming focus of Nigerians especially those crushed under the weight of these disastrous economic policies disguised as reforms is to remove the most wicked, draconian regime in this country’s history.

Woe betide any motherfker who dares say Tinubu should be allowed to finish eight years, or that it’s the South’s turn. That motherfker will be reminded that Tinubu and his gang never let Goodluck Jonathan, a Southerner complete his own eight years

Thank you! Thank you so freaking much.

This bullshit retrogressive system of "it's the turn of X" has always been so pathetically useless and infuriating. What happened to actual results and performance? What happened to track records?

This country gets on my freaking nerves man. 🤦🏽

DeepSight:
Long ago, in the storied history of Nairaland, it was said that there was a fatwaa/ death threat pronounced against Seun by some Muslims.

Lol, really? 😃