this post was submitted on 12 Sep 2025
-15 points (29.7% liked)

Showerthoughts

37223 readers
708 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The most popular seem to be lighthearted clever little truths, hidden in daily life.

Here are some examples to inspire your own showerthoughts:

Rules

  1. All posts must be showerthoughts
  2. The entire showerthought must be in the title
  3. No politics
    • If your topic is in a grey area, please phrase it to emphasize the fascinating aspects, not the dramatic aspects. You can do this by avoiding overly politicized terms such as "capitalism" and "communism". If you must make comparisons, you can say something is different without saying something is better/worse.
    • A good place for politics is c/politicaldiscussion
  4. Posts must be original/unique
  5. Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct and the TOS

If you made it this far, showerthoughts is accepting new mods. This community is generally tame so its not a lot of work, but having a few more mods would help reports get addressed a little sooner.

Whats it like to be a mod? Reports just show up as messages in your Lemmy inbox, and if a different mod has already addressed the report, the message goes away and you never worry about it.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] howrar@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

In these examples, the ideal scenarios described aren't any more logical or empathetic than the real scenario. All you're saying is that particular people are more deserving of empathy than the people who are affected by their actions.

  • Example 1: People smell awful after smoking. Everyone else in the train sitting in the vicinity will have to deal with the smell for the duration of their ride. The more often this happens, the less likely people will be willing to take mass transit, leading to lots of other negative downstream effects for everyone on the planet. Do all these other people not also deserve empathy?
  • Example 2: Timeliness has real effects on people's lives. What if there's a disabled man waiting on this bus at a later stop? They planned their errand so that it's within their ability to handle given their disability, but a late bus means that the timing no longer aligns and it'll significantly extend the duration past what they can safely handle. Would this man not also deserve empathy? Poor timeliness for mass transit would also discourage people from using them.
  • Example 3: If the man smoking in example 1 is deserving of empathy with regards to his addictions, why not this passenger?
[–] quacky@lemmy.world 0 points 3 days ago (1 children)

They planned their errand

That's the problem if they didn't consider the limitations. It's a irrational expectation for the bus to be 100% efficient and always on time. Nothing is 100% efficient. It'd be a faulty expectation to assume that things (other than death, disease, aging, etc.) are certain or guaranteed.

not also deserve empathy?

Everyone deserves empathy. All sentient beings, including this hypothetical man.

Do all these other people not also deserve empathy?

Again, all people deserve empathy. It seems that you're making this a binary, "either/or", dilemma when I believe both the angry transit operator and the smoker are "not ideal", though I do have a bias toward the anger because that is aesthetically uglier than the smoking.

[–] howrar@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 days ago

if they didn't consider the limitations

They did, and planned for it to the best of their abilities given the available resources. Being disabled doesn't mean you stop trying to be a functional human being. The illogical thing to do is to sit at home and do nothing because you're not 100% certain that things will go well. Because as you said,

Nothing is 100% efficient [or certain or guaranteed]

So should we not strive to make things as predictable as possible?

Everyone deserves empathy. All sentient beings, including this hypothetical man.

Again, all people deserve empathy

And yet, your ideal scenarios, you keep favouring one person/group at the expense of another. I don't know if empathy is the word you actually mean to use. You can empathize with everyone while still favouring specific people, but your examples suggest that you're using "empathy" to mean the actions you take (or don't take) to help someone rather than the emotional state. In that case, it's is indeed a binary either/or. In your examples, what you do to help one person will negatively affect others.