I think your position represents a paradox then. If you “choose” to act, that choice is either of your own volition, in which case it is an example of true free will, or it is predetermined in which case it isn’t a “real” choice. Both branches represent a contradiction with your position, no?

Regardless, since you don’t believe in free will, you are either covered by option 2 or 4, depending on whether free will is real or not. How you choose to act doesn’t affect whether it exists or what you believe to be true.

As a parent, I can say with confidence it doesn’t have to be that bleak. My wife and I work 4 days a week and don’t own a car. Our kid’s school is nearby, so we don’t spend a lot of time travelling, and we both work from home a fair amount. We get to spend plenty of time with each other as a family and we’re certainly not working only for the sake of it.

That said, we are in the Netherlands, so depending on where you live things may be harder or even easier. In general I would say it is good to think about the kind of life you want to live, and the choice where you raise kids is an important one in that.

I’m agreeing with you, but I don’t think the phrases have to be condescending, smug or detached?

They surely point to a disagreement, but can’t they be used from such a position in a genuine capacity without implying the person is being condescending or smug about it?

Of course it’s easy to see how when those things are said to you, they may be perceived as smug or condescending, because the other person doesn’t want to agree with you. But that doesn’t necessarily make them so.

Not a native English speaker though, so genuinely curious about the nuances here.

Okay, I’ll spend one last reply on this, because I don’t appreciate getting a strawman assigned to me. I didn’t say getting “every character’s expressed desires being instantly granted” is the main thing making fiction interesting. I said it’s seeing actions play out that you normally don’t is what it makes it interesting. That’s quite a different thing.

And no, I still don’t think it’s a major plot point. It’s a plot point, yes, but the movies also left it out without real impact to the plot. That’s not a major plot point to me.

that’s a reason to have Beverly suggest it. Not a reason to have it actually happen.

Sorry, but that's just silly. If it were brought up as a suggestion that didn't happen, that would be even weirder than it actually happening. As a writer, you don't go around finding reasons to block your character's ideas, because that's a horribly anti-climactic thing to do, teasing your readers for no purpose, but worst of all, you don't get to see how the action pans out if it does happen, which is the primary thing that makes fiction interesting to begin with.

And no, not every action needs foreshadowing either. In the grand scheme of things, this whole scene that people fuss about isn't a major plot point in the book. I read the book twice (though even the second time was a while ago), and I had pretty much forgotten about it, until I saw people complaining it. But it still seems as if you think King has some moral obligation to guard and guide the actions of his characters. He doesn't, and thankfully he doesn't, because his books are more interesting for it.

As a writer, I disagree. Writers often write thinking from the perspective of their characters. If something makes sense from the character’s perspective, they’ll write it. It’s not an endorsement by the writer, it just makes for a natural and believable progression and that’s why the book is better for it.

I can bet you King never decided that he should include such a scene because it would make the book better. He did it because he was writing from her perspective, and it popped into his mind as something that made sense for her to do.

It’s not a fantasy, not an endorsement, and not a post-rationalisation either. And knowing his writing style, upon reflection he probably felt it belonged for shock value alone. Writers do have a knack for pushing boundaries, and he’s certainly got a taste of it.

I think there is an objective good. That goodness is Life itself. So long as we treat all Life with respect and try to live a life of balance, that makes us good. You are right though that this is still a very simplified view, and what it means to "live in balance" can depend on the situation or environment. But it's a starting point at least.

As for forgiveness, it's a choice. If someone makes an honest mistake, it should be easy to forgive them, as whatever harm they caused was not intentional. But if someone makes a wilful mistake, it will be harder to forgive them. And yet, because forgiveness is a choice, we can look at the reasons why someone acted in a manner that was harmful, and still decide to forgive them, especially if they repent.

As for consequences, those are results of our actions, whether intentional or unintentional. They are not strictly related to the concept of forgiveness, but generally speaking, we find it easy to forgive someone if their actions are harmless, or if the consequences don't affect us personally. But if someone's actions do affect us, we find it harder to forgive, regardless of whether something was an honest mistake or not. But the key to forgiveness, in my opinion, is that we need to look beyond the consequences and look beyond how we were personally affected. Forgiveness is a choice, and that choice is easier to make if our emotion is not muddied by consequence.

It’s an important step, yes. You are the master of your own happiness. Take care!

I’ll add one: to appreciate the beauty of life itself, or in other words: be happy.

That does tie in with the “it gets better” and you’ll have to trust me when I say that happiness can be found.

But for whatever it’s worth, I wasn’t always happy, and I went through very dark places in the past. Yet I found happiness in multiple places and I honestly don’t feel like I need to pretend anymore.

However that might not mean a lot if I didn’t give some pointers to help you find it. To find happiness the best thing you can is to find peace within yourself, which implies becoming at peace with who you are. First of all, don’t let the sadness in the world distract you from your own happiness, because the best way to combat the world’s sadness is by being happy yourself. Then you can become an example for others to become happy too. And second, don’t assume it means nothing. We live in a spiritual place that’s mysterious and wonderful. There’s endless happiness to be found there. If you don’t think that’s true, I believe you owe it to yourself to explore so that you may find it. Because you can. And when you do, things will get better. Trust.

Silver actually interacts horribly with and ruins the flavour of some foods. There’s a reason why silver cups often have gold plating on the inside to not ruin the taste of wine.

I’d stick with the steel any time.

That’s not just pedantry, that’s unnecessarily narrow-minded. Ever heard of the corrupted heart? According to your definition, that’s an impossibility, unless the heart belongs to someone in authority, or something, I guess.

The point is, there is more than a single interpretation of things, and there is not a singular definition of corruption. Anyone can be corrupted, and giving examples that show that lawlessness permeates every level of society is a great way of showing that corruption is likely endemic in the culture.

I’m Dutch too, and I used to work 8h/day 4 days a week. And my productivity became even better than when I worked 5 days a week. I could kill it those 4 days, and be rested enough the next week so I could kill it again. It worked wonders.

I like the rhetoric, because it means that my employer got something out of it too. But I don’t think it implies that was the only reason it should be given. I obviously enjoyed the time off for my own reasons.