About growing up - and being immature for a bit

Maybe ...

Anyhow. I think for me it's settled, that if I have to write something and I don't - I don't get anything else done either. And - so ... if I think about writing something and don't do so right away; And get nothing done - that might be a way for me to tell whether or not it's important. But ... ultimately ... I can't really be certain ... just yet.

So ... going in ... I have a really simple ... hypothesis. For my own ... tastes ... it's pretty much fact; And from what I know about the world around me ... it might just be a general truth. And so ... let's start by ... visiting an already established topic. The matter of time and change. Specifically the change of the normal accross historical ages. In this case what we're interested in is life expectancy. So - prior to certain medical advancements, enlightenments of common sense and stuff ... life expectancy - if I remember correctly - sat at around 40 to 50. Something like that. So a person would at first 'grow up' to do labor; And then die eventually. There isn't much that anyone could do.

That now would be one angle to get at my hypothesis here. Another one would be to speak or think of midlife crisis. I mean, I personally ever only heard of it - and eventually became confident that I had lived my life as much to my own heart's content as possibly possible to me; I could not possibly have any regrets going into my 40s. So, I shouldn't run into having a midlife crisis. But then, throughout this year, I ... started to notice things that would possibly require me to rethink my concept of what a midlife crisis is.

Now, you might be able to guess what I'm trying to get at. But - in the meantime we can think of these two observations side by side - and ... wonder. Like ... Midlife crisis seems to be somewhat consistently locked to like ... the early 40s? - while at some point in time, that was roughly as old as one might hope to get. So, it's fair to say that if we never had the cultural opportunity to deal with our increased life expectancy in terms of that - or similar - phenomena/non ... we're stuck in some kind of confusion between some "cultural subconscious" and the contemporary reality ... or how to put it.

Maybe ... that was too much at once.

I mean - sure we might think of Midlife Crisis as missing something; In place of death. It's sensible to assume as much, though ... I fear the blunthammer take on this being just awfully stupid. But - sure. People would grow up as raised by their parents, seeing the world around them ... and living to pass on one's genes while loosely aligned to some cultural body ... that was life. And the mindset wouldn't have to change going into more and more sophisticated times. Well, except that one could simply work longer. And maybe more. Until eventually ... well ... retirement ... became a fun little idea we had; Which may have been around ... who knows. The exact detail won't matter too much. I suppose accross ups and downs - there's some "least viable" way of life that we might find confirmed accross times and spaces - grow up, work, grow old and die. Sure thing.

My assumption now is ... well ... that 'growing up' - or 'becoming an adult' - more to the point, is something that doesn't happen until our "midlife crisis" - and that the "midlife crisis" is actually, more to the point, our confusion of growing up.

And sure enough. If it were so, we wouldn't necessarily know about it ... because nobody told us. Everyone always told us that we're supposed to be 'grown up' by the time we turn 18 or 21 - which is fair, compared to ... whatever it may have been, like ... 8 or 16 ..., given that we also get to live longer ... I assume.
And without anyone ever thinking of it this way, nothing of the sort could culturally develop.

Now, I for my part ... I notice that my body ... is growing old. Sure thing. But it's more like ... the final - more or less - realization that what I learned of my body growing up so far ... no longer holds true. I mean, as a child I was pretty ... active. I guess ... agile would be the best word. I used to climb trees a lot; And stuff ... not to go into too much detail, but ... now more and more joints and bones become a bit of a ... thing. In other words, I have to ... re-learn ... what it means to be alive.
Or - in simplest terms and brought to the point: The midlife crisis, or how to put it - uhm - is like a second childhood.

Is it not?

So, to clarify: this comes of my own experience and maybe these musings don't hold any water outside of my own - but ... things are changing for me. Things most certainly tied to age and growing up. Growing up in the technical sense. I mean, the thought of ones lifespan and the matter of 40 being like halfway towards a pretty decent 80 year life expectancy ... did cross my mind on and off. But it is around now that I ... basically start to feel the gravity of it. That I'm approaching the halfway point; So that the idea of having about as much time left as I've had so far ... is actually on the forefront of my consciousness.

Give or take.

Sure. On top of that I just moved into a new home, the first time I also dare to call the "four walls" I occupy my home; While so also dealing with a lot of the stuff that comes with it. And yet that doesn't really seem to be why I feel the way I do about my age.

But also ... it was like ... literally this morning where this crossed my mind. This whole topic. Or yesterday evening. So ... it's maybe a bit early to make any more of it; But I'm pretty sure that this is a motion that will run its course and ... thus the motion itself ... is certainly there.
And I'm probably not the first one to notice.

So, beyond those things I don't really have anything to tell you. About it. And I think I might clap myself on the shoulder ... that I so far have grown away from indulging into too much theory-crafting and such. Thus, I might revisit this on and off, while for now, I'm moving on to another topic.

Another topic

The 'being immature for a bit' part.

So, I haven't played MTG Arena in quite some time; And I have similar feelings about revisiting it as I have about revisiting League of Legends. There is a certain fatigue ... nourishing a deep reluctance to get back into it. And it clearly relates to some perceived "bullshit". Some kind of agony that would appear to be thrust upon me as I'd entertain playing the game. Generally I'd ... regard it to be "Competition Fatigue" - as on one hand there's an ambition to win in a competitive game; And on the other a frustration over loosing. But given that I still very well enjoy Street Fighter - I might blame the randomness of it; That so sometimes bad luck would just ... get in the way of what skill might be involved. So, misfortune creating a kind of frustration as it might otherwise create fun. But ... adding the two sides together ... they should eventually even out; With skill being a way to beat the odds.

So, what's wrong? I ... saw a video earlier. It highlights "the ways in which MTG Arena Cheats on You" - and watching it really triggered all those bad feelings that make me reluctant to play MTG Arena again. I might even compare it to Trauma. I mean, Trauma is I think one of those things that we generally associate to really ... big, tough, situations ... horrible things ... as those would be the ways by which the underlying issue would first creep into our consciousness. I guess it's like suffering a really bad infection; Not knowing about bacteria and anti-biotics. We might regard it as its own separate thing. Totally distinct from having a cold or ... whatever.
Knowing that stuff however allows us to talk of infections in a more precise manner - thus however "undercutting" all those worse case infections one might suffer.
So yes - there is serious and severe Trauma that people might suffer and what I might call Trauma here would be an insult to all those that have like ... 'real' Traumas. Yet, the kind of Trauma I speak of is ... not entirely meaningless. I guess we might call "it" negative re-enforcement.

Anyway - the thing is that MTG Arena is fixed ... or rigged ... in many different ways. Some yet merely speculated upon - and sure, I did at occasion have the feeling that it cheats on me, but ... I wouldn't dare saying it out loud. I mean, I already do share a fair share of ... "unpopular opinions" ... I don't feel a great need to put even more of a burden upon me.

Now - two good examples that come to mind are the "Land flood and drought" issue and the "where are my cards?" issue. So, these being things I also experienced - like, more than once. To the point that I could subconsciously already anticipate whether I'd get land flooded or starved - and that it happened more than once that the card I wanted - of which I sure had 4 in my deck - didn't get drawn way down until I had like ... 20 or less cards left in my library.
The land issue is possibly best to highlight how the Trauma comes together.
The thing is this: At the beginning of the game you get 7 cards and you have to decide whether to keep them or not. Outside of having a decent starting hand you might have either too many or too few lands at hand ... and you might feel inclined to speculate on your chances and thus take a bit of a risk. So, if you're in this situation somewhat frequently - and the odds always play out the same ... you start to notice that there's little to no hope to speculate ... against the odds.
The odds being ... if you have barely a land in the starting hand you won't draw enough lands ... and if you have too many you might probably draw all of the lands before you'r halfway through the deck.
And that ... like ... isn't even random! And realizing that there's consistency to that kind of bullshit ... consolidates the impression that the randomness of it ... isn't actually real. So, compared to what you'd want or expect out of a card game ... the game gives you the finger ... or a bitter pill to swallow - and that bitter pill is ... the Trauma spoken of here.

Some smartass might then point out that it's just that the rules are different and that one should adapt. Well. Like how some decks that only need one mana to win would run only 13 lands because they could be certain that they'd almost certainly get at least one land into their starting hand either way.
Which some would call cheating.

In a way.

The thing is ... I bring this up because to me it's like a neat little example of what's wrong with the world. People might like the creativity or insight or understanding to make sense of it outside of immediate examples given - unless they themselves also have a similar experience with something.
And it's not at all similar to how certain sports teams tend to win more - as people know that team X and Y has more money and better access to top level players.

At the end of the day, some of the ways MTG Arena Cheats on you are proven ... as the video claims ... and that just doesn't make for a fun experience. And somehow ... it seems like there are people that don't understand that. Or don't want to understand that. Because somehow ... they do all that because it somehow ... improves the game? Is less frustrating for players? But how? I mean, people have been playing Card games like ... forever ... it's not like Card games needed manipulative RNG coding to be "saved" somehow.
The way I see it - there is literally no justification to replace a perfectly honest randomizer with any kind of Bullshit RNG - like, none at all. And people should start there - rather than just going with it and then demanding like ... reason.
Sure, it's kind of the same except that we start on different sides of the equation.

But it goes deeper. As with League of Legends I've heard that the game can literally ... put odds in your way. So, the game might per chance just decide that you're going to loose - and do what it might to make it so. At which point ... err ... why should I even bother? OK, granted - if the matchmaking or RNG were fair I'd eventually lose anyway ... fair enough! But I'd then rather lose fair and square - while also winning fair and square - as opposed to going by some algorithm's mood.
Or whatever.
Ignoring the more mischievous implications (*cough*"privilege"*cough*) thereof for the time being.

And in all that ... I suppose it's when the devs decide to put some "did you enjoy this match?" kind of nonsense in there, that they're so high off their own Bullshit that they don't even realize how stupid of a question that is!
It's not like they'll realize that the reason why we might not is the very same thing they wouldn't change anyway.

Hmmm ... geeez ... I wonder ...

Hmmm ... strange, that's weird ...

Hmmm ... geez ...

On totally unrelated account it has been concluded that: Rich people produce more pollution than poor people!
[emphatic thumbs up]

In the meantime there's also all of that talk I'm hearing of ... WOTC downsizing their physical card services while focusing more on Digital. [A solitary scream of agony echoes through the nightfallen forest].
I don't know much about it, but it seems to be the kind of thing "these people" would do. Have a crappy foundation and bet all on its success at the cost of all the things that have been just going well enough. Well, outside of the infinite growth part I suppose.

But whatever.
What might just rob me the wrongest about all this, is the whole "playing God" angle of it. Next to possibly getting gaslit into believing that I suck ... more than I actually do.

And now?

I'm always surprised when I find how easily some of the points I make are countered. I would think I'd have an airtight case - and then stumble upon an argument that ... makes for a really simple rebuttal.

Like ... Romans 1:20. To me it's a solid statement that indicates to us that the homophobic passages aren't to be taken as 'anti gay'. So, we know there is homosexuality and even trans-sexuality in nature; Hence that, in and of itself, cannot be unnatural. But then one might point out the odd social codes some animals live by - like how Dolphins do cancel culture or how some animals will throw their babies in front of predators in order to escape ... to countering with the case that we should barely judge what's right by looking at nature.
And generally I try not to bother. I've written about that a few times, but maybe a little refresher is ... justified. Sure, it can be complicated to find the right words to rebut such a rebuttal. And given that I not only have an interest in rebutting those rebuttals, but also experience and stuff, I might be your best guess. But ... I ... don't care! I don't want to care! I'm done giving a fuck! Yup, I ran out of fucks to give on such matters. A while ago. Possibly even a long while ago. But ... this passage is kind of crucial ... so ... I might as well.

Fixing that single issue may however not serve as an adequate example for all the other "similar" issues. How could it be that merely being right once would give one a free pass on every issue ever? But at any rate do you have to wonder about, or hold an answer to: What you believe in and why!

So, all I could show you here - provided the rebuttal was delivered effectfully - is how stupid these alleged rebuttals can be.
"Always a pleasure".
The argument of the rebuttal implies that the argument it rebukes proposed us to take an example in nature to begin with. Which we don't. We can however look at nature and see how some ants carry their sick into exile so they won't infect the rest, mammals using their offspring to escape predators ... or Dolphins engaging in cancel culture ... and understand why they do it. What the mechanism there is. It is natural in a plain and simple ... evolutionary sense. Give or take. Why do some creatures kill the male after the act? Who knows? But even we at times find reason to focus on the procreation in a prolonged disregard for the involved parties after the fact. Like surrogate motherhood. And however awful it might sound or be - there might be cases in which it would be totally justified to throw your kids in front of the predator. The thing is that when given the chance we'd judge those instances on a case by case basis. Rather than calling them either good or bad by default.
To say: Don't judge!
I mean - if you now want to go and say that you then might just throw your kids in front of the next bus ... sure! You do you, we're all free spirited beings. But I don't see what point that would make - or why one would or should go to such lengths to make one. Which is only the ... tip of that particular iceberg.
As for Cancel Culture ... that shit's even in the Bible. It's called "Stoning". To which Jesus added: If you are without Sin, throw the first stone. Now, I'm sure that this didn't mean that we should be OK with hypocrisy and faithlessness undermining the Truth - but that we should be more prudent when it comes to determining the right and wrong of certain habits.

On a different note does merely negating the core expression of the verse not tell us why it's there to begin with. And if it's there for no reason ... why stop there? I mean, it seems to be one of those verses that ... tries to make a big point. It's like a self-contained statement ... without any statement in the Bible to ... like ... tell us why it doesn't say what it most obviously says!

Anyhow ... I guess I'm done for now.