Man[goes] to Speak

The meaning that a friendly phrase carries, whether it is literal intent or politeness, depends on the relations between different parties. It is not necessary that the phrase “How are you?” communicates politeness: maybe a person asked that to his friend, genuinely wondering how his friend is. Maybe you are worried about a teacher that you are not close with because of the Coronavirus outbreak and you need something to be graded quickly, or you need to meet with a tutor or something. I dunno.

Then you might say that between friends, they will say “How r u?” But until about 4ish years ago it wasn’t that popular. I wasn’t using it commonly among closer people until 2-3 years ago. Although abbreviations are getting more common among closer people, meaning that it is more likely than not that their words carry literal intent, many people still use proper formal-ish language, like many parents. And how does one tell the difference between abbreviations and full words while speaking?

As such, I think the human brain is, many times, capable enough to distinguish the meaning of somebody’s words, like how many times we can tell when somebody is being sarcastic. And there are many phrases that can be consider just be used to polite. For example, I use “Hope you are doing well” in the beginning of many of my formal e-mails and messages. Sometimes, I actually mean it and sometimes I don’t. And sometimes I expect people to think of it as literal to start a conversation. As such it is almost impossible to make a list of phrases that only carry politeness and not literal intent and many times that list may be wrong. Even then these phrases could switch between literal intent and just politeness or maybe even be a combination depending on the sender’s mood, the time, the urgency, etc. There are many factors that come into speech and its effect. This is why it is hard to be a great public speaker.
And here’s really bad meme done using photos

Man[goes] to Power

"Janus-faced god . . . wounds and power"

"The ancient Roman god Janus was imagined to have two faces looking in opposite directions."

Without wounds, there wouldn't power and without power, there wouldn't be wounds.

Essentially, they are two sides of the same coin.

 And it's not just having power, but also the pursuit of power. Also vice versa.

Power can be in many forms be it respect, dominance, etc.

Veterans earn respect because they are brave enough to put themselves at risk of wounds (maybe even death) for the protection of the country.

And in the pursuit of the opposite, we can observe the Nazis & Japanese in World War 2.

The wounds that come from the struggle for power is what differs many people from chasing it.

These wounds don't necessarily have to physical or visible. It can be the memories created or the emotions. It will many times be intangible. Maybe it is the "eternal PTSD" (quoted from a song I'm currently listening to) created.

The thing is that many things in life create "warzone[s] in my head" or be it anyone else.

Life is all about the mind

 This is why I love analyzing wars or following Elon Musk. And, also playing strategy games.

In WW2, the two major psychological fights, at least in the European theatre, was between Hitler & Stalin and Roosevelt & Churchill.

Hitler & Stalin were both scared of each other and both knew that the other opposed the other's ideologies. Due them being wary of the other, the German invasion of Russia occurred, even though there was a treaty between the two. The Germans stationed troops near the Soviet border because Hitler was wary of Stalin and his desire for power.

Coupling this with Hess' secret flight to Britian, Stalin thought Hitler was backstabbing him.

And so on . . .

Psychology is very important to survive in the world. 

Man[goes] to Drive Through Chapel

Honestly, drive through marriage ceremonies aren't such a bad idea.

See, this is not my personal experience and I don't have much credibility on this topic. But, eh, whatever . . .

I have hear/read many stories/recollections about the change associated with marriage. Some of them come from manga, but anyway . . . Manga carries, in many cases, good messages. 

They say that after marriage, it became more professionalish or less interactive or something. I feel like this happens due the large scale of many weddings. Yes, marriage is a big step, but doesn't need to taken in a step. It can be taken through smaller steps. I think this could be provided by a smaller scale marriage such as a drive through wedding. It doesn't leave such a big imprint that defined later actions. I think a sudden big step is a problem with arranged marriages. 

Maybe the government of Singapore and Japan should provide free small homes for genuine couples to experience staying together to increase their low birthrates. 

Spending some nights could a small step, then starting to stay in the same house (this itself is a big step). Honestly, I couldn't talk about these steps since I am 16 and I haven't been in a relationship. Man, I don't even have proper friends.

On the other hand, anyone want to join with me to start a drive through marriage chain in India. People would be flocking to us. Cheap and Fast! Save so much money and maybe have the marriage dinner in a nearby restaurant or something. Actually, we might have to install multiple drive-throughs in the same establishment.

Man[goes] to Suffer

The question of whether a lobster suffers while being boiled alive is truly a confusing one. Is it based on its action or scientific proof? 

I think its is more about if the being feels like it/he/she is dying. For example, if a person is drowning, that person will thrash around and suffer. The feeling of dying itself is a stimulus and isn't that feeling torturous, even though it is a stimulus. So, the argument that a lobster's thrashing is just a reaction to a stimulus and is not suffering is invalid.

Suffering is not just pain. It doesn't just have to be physical, it can also be mental or emotional. If we bring this as a factor into the treatment of animals, lobsters aren't the only ones being mistreated. What about all the animals being farmed in tight spaces? What about the lack of freedom in zoos?

In that sense, we are weak minded race that doesn't linger to either extreme. We also see this in politics. Most of us linger around being a centrist with many extremist groups being eradicated. This, I think, is the reason of the human survival and dominance. We try to adapt with change, like in the instance of climate change due to our actions. However, we need to make our adaptions faster. For this we need to be more extreme. It is ironic in a sense but it is like math. If velocity is positive then acceleration could still be negative.

Basically, it is good that beliefs of most humans are not extreme however when changing them we need to extreme (faster) to adapter faster.