|
Post by cupcakes on Apr 19, 2018 3:40:33 GMT
|
|
|
Post by goz on Apr 19, 2018 7:23:13 GMT
Please do not pollute this thread with your personal diatribe as on the other thread. That platform is still active. Please keep it there. You both do it well Fuck off from this more open minded thread. Your argument in that thread is personal and has valididity. so please keep that there, as we discuss other issues here.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Apr 19, 2018 7:31:33 GMT
tpfkar Please do not pollute this thread with your personal diatribe as on the other thread. That platform is still active. Please keep it there. You both do it well Fuck off from this more open minded thread. Your argument in that thread is personal and has valididity. so please keep that there, as we discuss other issues here. You wouldn't know "open minded" if it slapped you upside your jabbering massively hypocritical diatribe head. I reply to post content, including the nonsensical Tourettes kind from senility-dancing old bats. List of massacres in Australia
|
|
|
Post by goz on Apr 19, 2018 7:35:09 GMT
tpfkar Please do not pollute this thread with your personal diatribe as on the other thread. That platform is still active. Please keep it there. You both do it well Fuck off from this more open minded thread. Your argument in that thread is personal and has valididity. so please keep that there, as we discuss other issues here. You wouldn't know "open minded" if it slapped you upside your jabbering massively hypocritical diatribe head. I reply to post content, including the nonsensical Tourettes kind from senility-dancing old bats. List of massacres in AustraliaBack to your Mic/Cupcakes marathon....nothing to see here.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Apr 19, 2018 7:38:29 GMT
tpfkar You wouldn't know "open minded" if it slapped you upside your jabbering massively hypocritical diatribe head. I reply to post content, including the nonsensical Tourettes kind from senility-dancing old bats. List of massacres in AustraliaBack to your Mic/Cupcakes marathon....nothing to see here. Just you making a doddering old massively hypocritical fool out of yourself yet again. And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms; or to raise standing armies, unless necessary for the defense of the United States, or of some one or more of them; or to prevent the people from petitioning, in a peaceable and orderly manner, the federal legislature, for a redress of grievances; or to subject the people to unreasonable searches and seizures of their persons, papers or possessions.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2018 13:41:53 GMT
The anti-natalist position being the exact opposite of my own, I feel the need to oppose it, as its proponent’s fervor seems inexhaustible. He seems to by turns appeal to some “objective” ethics supposedly dictated by nature (“bad” is what evolution programs us to avoid, “good” merely the avoidance and amelioration of the bad) and some “subjectivist” belief that bad is what any given individual feels is bad. Thus, he seems to have taken the worst of both orientations to their dead end – in his view, life, especially sentient life, should be eliminated to remove any “suffering” from the universe. Earlier in the thread, I mentioned Erikson and his idea of “negative identity” as well as Hofkirchner and his idea of values in historical context. Putting the former in such context, I found some articles. The first is a research thesis that connects Erikson’s idea to borderline personality disorder, which it finds overwhelmingly correlates with insecure attachment styles. The next is a meta-analysis showing such attachment styles, or dispositions, result from mistreatment of very young children. While neoliberalism, with its alienating effects, continues to encroach on every aspect of our lives, I do see some progress in countering these effects, especially for emerging voices. Interesting that you "feel the need to oppose it" by not directly addressing anyone actually propounding antinatalist views and instead hiding your opposition in a thread with a title that has nothing to do with antinatalism. I think that people should be allowed to determine how much suffering is worth the reward for themselves. I do not think that they should be freely able to drag along other people in their joy ride, when all the needs, desires and goals for doing so reside only in the mind of the people doing the imposing, and the costs will almost entirely be paid by the person upon whom the burden is being imposed. Evolution does not work towards creating 'satisfied' and 'happy' beings, it works towards creating organisms that are best adapted to surviving in the environment in which they reside. In the case of sentient organisms, suffering is the mechanism which drives evolutionary success. An organism whose baseline disposition is one of satisfaction is one that is not strongly motivated to compete with other organisms; nor even strongly motivated to meet its own biological needs for continued living. This thread has evolved from one about control of the media (one way voices emerge,) to one encompassing other forms of control. Your position has been formed by cultural forces in line with those that ended the fairness doctrine -- using Darwinism rather than earlier forms of belief to justify itself. You seem to accept this appeal to an " objective" morality, but are guided by some feeling that life is "torture." My last post shows evidence that this feeling is at most a phenotypic response to the environment (including the culture that arose from the aforementioned forces.) Thus, these feelings are treatable and not metaphysical. goz: I think this answers your question also -- Let me know!
|
|
|
Post by goz on Apr 20, 2018 1:05:03 GMT
tpfkar Back to your Mic/Cupcakes marathon....nothing to see here. Just you making a doddering old massively hypocritical fool out of yourself yet again. And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms; or to raise standing armies, unless necessary for the defense of the United States, or of some one or more of them; or to prevent the people from petitioning, in a peaceable and orderly manner, the federal legislature, for a redress of grievances; or to subject the people to unreasonable searches and seizures of their persons, papers or possessions....and you are a nasty piece of work that nobody wishes to engage on here so I add myself to that venerable list...bye bye.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2018 1:10:17 GMT
Interesting that you "feel the need to oppose it" by not directly addressing anyone actually propounding antinatalist views and instead hiding your opposition in a thread with a title that has nothing to do with antinatalism. I think that people should be allowed to determine how much suffering is worth the reward for themselves. I do not think that they should be freely able to drag along other people in their joy ride, when all the needs, desires and goals for doing so reside only in the mind of the people doing the imposing, and the costs will almost entirely be paid by the person upon whom the burden is being imposed. Evolution does not work towards creating 'satisfied' and 'happy' beings, it works towards creating organisms that are best adapted to surviving in the environment in which they reside. In the case of sentient organisms, suffering is the mechanism which drives evolutionary success. An organism whose baseline disposition is one of satisfaction is one that is not strongly motivated to compete with other organisms; nor even strongly motivated to meet its own biological needs for continued living. This thread has evolved from one about control of the media (one way voices emerge,) to one encompassing other forms of control. Your position has been formed by cultural forces in line with those that ended the fairness doctrine -- using Darwinism rather than earlier forms of belief to justify itself. You seem to accept this appeal to an " objective" morality, but are guided by some feeling that life is "torture." My last post shows evidence that this feeling is at most a phenotypic response to the environment (including the culture that arose from the aforementioned forces.) Thus, these feelings are treatable and not metaphysical. goz : I think this answers your question also -- Let me know! OK, I think I understand your reasoning. Sparing consideration for those who are less fortunate than you is a hallmark of borderline personality disorder, and I ought to seek out 'treatment' so that I can come round to your 'right' way of thinking that 'as long as I get what I want, it doesn't matter who else is stuck having to pay the cost'. Life is not 'torture' for me. It's an onerous imposition, but I manage it tolerably. Mostly because I'm relatively fortunate (in some ways) compared to many others. But I can't in good conscience ignore the fact that we're imposing catastrophically high costs on people who haven't consented to pay the bill. You think that my philosophy is an irrational reaction to 'cultural forces', but haven't stopped to question the heroic narrative that you have bought into whereby there's some need for us to keep creating more (infinitely precious) humans otherwise God will cry? That when you bring a child into the world, you're saving them from the torment of non-existence, and all the hazards that they will face are a small price to pay and that they should be thankful, even if they are born into a life of unremitting pain, toil, exploitation and hardship?
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Apr 20, 2018 1:12:24 GMT
tpfkar Just you making a doddering old massively hypocritical fool out of yourself yet again. And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms; or to raise standing armies, unless necessary for the defense of the United States, or of some one or more of them; or to prevent the people from petitioning, in a peaceable and orderly manner, the federal legislature, for a redress of grievances; or to subject the people to unreasonable searches and seizures of their persons, papers or possessions....and you are a nasty piece of work that nobody wishes to engage on here so I add myself to that venerable list...bye bye. And you're a diatribing nasty piece of hypocritical shyte caught in a nonsensical bark / "bye-bye" senile loop. List of massacres in Australia
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Apr 20, 2018 9:25:04 GMT
tpfkar Sparing consideration for those who are less fortunate than you is a hallmark of borderline personality disorder, and I ought to seek out 'treatment' so that I can come round to your 'right' way of thinking that 'as long as I get what I want, it doesn't matter who else is stuck having to pay the cost'. "Consideration" via grotesque abuse, mass murder and forced extinction, all for religious perfection, is a hallmark of advanced psychopathic homicidal psychosis. Before getting into the lesser morbid lunacies like "having to pay the cost". Morally I would be fine with post-birth abortions, but I realise that this would probably be too radical to ever be implemented.
|
|
|
Post by koskiewicz on Apr 20, 2018 15:50:13 GMT
...cat fight !!! CAT FIGHT...!!!
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Apr 21, 2018 2:54:45 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2018 11:43:11 GMT
This thread has evolved from one about control of the media (one way voices emerge,) to one encompassing other forms of control. Your position has been formed by cultural forces in line with those that ended the fairness doctrine -- using Darwinism rather than earlier forms of belief to justify itself. You seem to accept this appeal to an " objective" morality, but are guided by some feeling that life is "torture." My last post shows evidence that this feeling is at most a phenotypic response to the environment (including the culture that arose from the aforementioned forces.) Thus, these feelings are treatable and not metaphysical. goz : I think this answers your question also -- Let me know! OK, I think I understand your reasoning. Sparing consideration for those who are less fortunate than you is a hallmark of borderline personality disorder, and I ought to seek out 'treatment' so that I can come round to your 'right' way of thinking that 'as long as I get what I want, it doesn't matter who else is stuck having to pay the cost'. Life is not 'torture' for me. It's an onerous imposition, but I manage it tolerably. Mostly because I'm relatively fortunate (in some ways) compared to many others. But I can't in good conscience ignore the fact that we're imposing catastrophically high costs on people who haven't consented to pay the bill. You think that my philosophy is an irrational reaction to 'cultural forces', but haven't stopped to question the heroic narrative that you have bought into whereby there's some need for us to keep creating more (infinitely precious) humans otherwise God will cry? That when you bring a child into the world, you're saving them from the torment of non-existence, and all the hazards that they will face are a small price to pay and that they should be thankful, even if they are born into a life of unremitting pain, toil, exploitation and hardship? That Mic is apparently not suffering shows that my initial judgment was too charitable. Amelioration is about helping existent (or at least probable) life and creating conditions to reduce (or eliminate) likelihood of suffering to living things. Mic is twisting this concept and eliding any possible attempts to help life in favor of eliminating life (and thus any chance of meaning from what life has experienced so far.) The only people who would find this hopeless, dead universe appealing would be psychopaths.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2018 18:53:34 GMT
OK, I think I understand your reasoning. Sparing consideration for those who are less fortunate than you is a hallmark of borderline personality disorder, and I ought to seek out 'treatment' so that I can come round to your 'right' way of thinking that 'as long as I get what I want, it doesn't matter who else is stuck having to pay the cost'. Life is not 'torture' for me. It's an onerous imposition, but I manage it tolerably. Mostly because I'm relatively fortunate (in some ways) compared to many others. But I can't in good conscience ignore the fact that we're imposing catastrophically high costs on people who haven't consented to pay the bill. You think that my philosophy is an irrational reaction to 'cultural forces', but haven't stopped to question the heroic narrative that you have bought into whereby there's some need for us to keep creating more (infinitely precious) humans otherwise God will cry? That when you bring a child into the world, you're saving them from the torment of non-existence, and all the hazards that they will face are a small price to pay and that they should be thankful, even if they are born into a life of unremitting pain, toil, exploitation and hardship? That Mic is apparently not suffering shows that my initial judgment was too charitable. Amelioration is about helping existent (or at least probable) life and creating conditions to reduce (or eliminate) likelihood of suffering to living things. Mic is twisting this concept and eliding any possible attempts to help life in favor of eliminating life (and thus any chance of meaning from what life has experienced so far.) The only people who would find this hopeless, dead universe appealing would be psychopaths. What does "appealing" have to do with a lifeless universe? There is no appealing nor unappealing in a universe with no conscious observers. How can you 'help' (sentient) life when it is nothing more than a bottomless pit of needs and addictions? What more is there other than imperfectly cleaning up the mess that you make? I am suffering, but only mildly by the standards of human life.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2018 21:00:58 GMT
Researching yesterday’s post I found a reference to the above book, the title of which brought me back to this thread. Coincidentally, the Common Dreams article from May Day’s protests recommended this editorial which emphasizes the importance of getting one’s voice heard. Another related editorial discussed the Teacher’s strike in Arizona – a state that owes its very existence to labor’s opposition to the stranglehold of mining and railroad interests. Further, its constitution, “arguably the most progressive … at the time,” declared that its “legislature shall make such appropriations, to be met by taxation, as shall insure the proper maintenance of all state educational institutions, and shall make such special appropriations as shall provide for their development and improvement." Such a document would make the actions of that State’s GOP-run government unconstitutional.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2018 18:19:28 GMT
“I don’t understand … Is it modern?” - Emperor Joseph II from AmadeusI found a fascinating essay by science-of-mind philosopher Daniel Dennett that speaks to many themes I have discussed. I thought I’d share it along with a couple of scenes from the above-quoted movie that can illustrate some of its points:
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2018 20:39:47 GMT
Now for some good news and a song to celebrate:
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2018 17:20:00 GMT
"No one taught me," Arachne replied. "I learned how to do it as I sat in the sun and the shade; but no one showed me." "But it may be that Athena, goddess of wisdom, taught you, and you did not know it." - James Baldwin (No, not that one.) “To give praise is not enough, let me be praised as well, and not allow my divine powers to be scorned without inflicting punishment.” – Ovid's MinervaThe oddly nostalgic mood I got from my last post and recent dialogue brought to mind a series of books popular in my childhood, the classic Bookshelf for Boys and Girls. In my research, I found that it was much older than I had thought – first published in 1912. The story quoted above, in fact, was written in 1895 by a self-taught school superintendent-turned-editor and prolific writer of children’s literature. Its inclusion into this University Society series, published a year after the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire, is no doubt coincidental. Comparison of the ancient story and its gilded-age repackaging provides another example of the unconscious, the US unconscious I discussed in my last post.
|
|