The Japanese say “shouganai” which literally translates to “It can’t be helped.”
The problem is, 90% of the time, it absolutely can be helped.
The literal translation is “there’s no way/method”. Which figuratively translates into “can’t be helped”.
I feel like “it is what it is” is too often shit on.
I had a boss from whom I learned about staying calm and keeping steady course.
His favorite saying was “it is what it is” and it was always in the context of simply recognizing the reality for what it is, instead of hoping or wishing it was something else or lamenting over how it should have gone a different way. Then, from the point of accepting that “it is what it is” we would focus on how to get to where we wanted to be.
Sure it can be used dismissively, but I feel like people always just dismiss it as a cliche when it’s actually usually a very good philosophy.
“Though-terminating” is not necessarily a negative thing.
Like how your boss used it: stop the train of anger and reframe the problem in a more constructive way.
It’s still terminating a thought, it just wasn’t a productive thought and needed terminating.
Edit: typo
Good point, I didn’t really consider that it could be used in a good way.
Although, in my defense, they are using the term cliche which usually has negative connotations.
I mean even cliches are cliche right?
So many people just don’t like negative connotation things because they just don’t like their answer.
Arguing semantics is literally arguing about the definition of a word which is absolutely pivotal when determining stances on things. Arguing semantics is one of the most important things you can do when arguing. There is nothing negative about it.
Agree to disagree. It literally means you’ve gotten so far along in your debate that you’ve found that rhetorical lynch pin of an argument. It’s where the true disagreement lies. And too many people also think there AREN’T black and white scenarios when you get to them. More often than not, it’s because you’ve narrowed it down to A or B. There is NO other option.
You either think it’s okay to destroy an embryo or fetus because you’re more important than a long what if, or you think it’s the same as murdering an 18 year old in cold blood.
You can slowly deprogram some people from those lynchpin scenarios. But it isn’t going to happen when you find it.
People are not run on pure logic. More often than not they run on what they were born with reinforced through nurture. They need time to change strong thoughts and opinions they’ve held because they’re strong for a reason.
I had a boss who used to say the same thing. He was telling us “We didn’t set this dumpster on fire, but somehow it’s our job to handle it. No point bitching, so roll your sleeves up and get to it.” I’ve started saying the same thing for the same reason.
I agree with this. I use the phrase essentially as “this is the reality” to either set a baseline, or just a different way to say c’est la vie. It frustrates me when people say it’s always a dismissive phrase, because when I am dissmive with it I’m not doing so in a negative way. There’s something to be said about letting little inconveniences lie and fade away.
I agree, but I prefer “you have to play the ball as it lies”. It’s a similar sentiment, but more active so it doesn’t lend itself as much to defeatist readings. We can’t change reality, this is the situation we find ourselves in, but yes, we will find a path forward regardless.
Thought Terminating Cliches can be useful because it is not productive to worry about things over which you have no power.
Not YOLO, though, which is often used to stop thinking about the consequences of choosing to do something stupid.
I also often hear “It is what it is” to mean “someone made a bad decision and I’m not fighting it like I should.”
if a bear falls in the woods, and nobody is there to witness it, does it make a sound?
It’s specifically good when you’re ruminating.
This term seems like just an insult wearing academic robes. And a tautology. All cliches over simplify the world, side-stepping complex analysis.
There’s nothing “thought terminating” about acknowledging that a problem is beyond your scope - which is what the first two mean. I’ve only heard YOLO used to encourage risk-taking, which is completely different.
Realistically, these are often just social cues that you’re bored with the conversation.
Obviously whether you use a cliche to avoid thinking deeper on a topic or for some other reason changes with each use. It’s not inherent to the phrase.
I don’t think either of these are really thought terminating cliches inherently. The phrase is more for their usage as a rhetorical device to end arguments in certain ways. They become them when they are “used to intentionally dismiss dissent or justify fallacious logic” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought-terminating_cliché)
Ending an argument often involves dismissing dissent. The end of an argument is also the end of thought on that argument. You’re just rewording the original term, that you’re arguing against.
It ends the argument it doesn’t complete the argument.
You’ve essentially just stopped talking about the topic. No consensus has been arrived at. Possibly because one was not possible.
The Wikipedia article has multiple conflicting definitions, including:
"any use of the language, especially repeated phrases, to ward off forbidden thoughts”
“Claim Y sounds catchy. Therefore, claim Y is true.”
“the start and finish of any ideological analysis”
The problem is that the term is just BS, in part because the idea it was made to support is complete BS.
Defining ‘Totalitarianism’ was a cold war project of western academia, trying to come up with a way to say that the nazis and soviets were the same. They weren’t though. Only far right US Nationalists still claim this. The term has very low analytical use, so once the pressure to create this propaganda evaporated with the end of the USSR the term quickly became defunct.
Thought terminating cliches was coined by a psychologist in ’61 trying to claim that ‘totalist thought is characterized by thought terminating cliches.’ To translate: the west has reasoned ideology, everyone else just spouts cliches.
Well, if you recognize that a situation is beyond your scope you might use such a phrase to suggest moving on from further discussion either internally or in conversation with others. It might be less a magic phrase that stops thoughts and more a request to move on; a “conversation terminating” phrase.
The second one seems to be a bit of an Americanism I’m not really sure what it means. I take it to mean there’s nothing anyone can do about it, e.g. there is a storm coming and you are not sure if it will hit your house or not, whereas the first one means there’s nothing we can do about it but some other human can e.g. above your pay grade/ out of your responsibility.
Thank you! I felt the same way.
I find myself saying or thinking “it is what it is” pretty often, but not to terminate thought/conversation. If something bad happens and I can’t do anything about it except deal with it, that’s just the way it is. I see people complaining about those situations, and I feel like it’s just wasted energy; we should save that energy for the things we have some amount of control over.
Just walking away from someone who you’re talking to is generally seen as very rude, hence us developing social cues to demonstrate that you’re done with the topic/conversation.
I feel like “fuck it we ball” applies too. At least that’s how I use it.
Or the Klingon “Today is a good day to die.”
Instead of saying, “We’re all going to die, why even bother?”, they go, “We’re all going to die, let’s speedrun this bitch!”
