Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
You can leave this blank to post anonymously, or you can create a Tripcode by using the float Name#Password
A subject is required when posting a new thread
[*]Italic Text[/*]
[**]Bold Text[/**]
[~]Taimapedia Article[/~]
[%]Spoiler Text[/%]
>Highlight/Quote Text
[pre]Preformatted & Monospace text[/pre]
1. Numbered lists become ordered lists
* Bulleted lists become unordered lists


Kirtaner & Spardot's 420chan Wedding

To all guests, live viewers, and our Internet family, THANK YOU.
VODs will be edited soon, we are all so tired.
Wedding Gifts
Peace Man by Charles Crullerridge - Mon, 30 Jul 2018 17:41:08 EST ID:+6idXd9K No.209421 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1532986868323.jpg -(135338B / 132.17KB, 615x615) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 135338
Why do people hate pot heads? They aren't bad people?
Are people easily brainwashed?
Are people jealous they can't get the good good?
wat is it?
Oliver Clayway - Mon, 30 Jul 2018 17:59:23 EST ID:2LwLwSlz No.209423 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Isn't this more appropriate to /weed/? Wouldn't it make more sense to at least make it about drugs in general if you're going to put it here?

Anyway, your questions are easily answered, I assume you already know these answers:
>>Why do people hate pot heads?
There was a political and economic incentive to demonize pot and the people who use it. With other drugs, there was a manifest danger to the powers that be if people were allowed to use them freely. So, naturally, they used the mechanisms of society to ensure that those things were vilified and criminalized.
>> They aren't bad people?
"There is nothing good or bad, but thinking makes it so." What makes anything actually good or bad? And to what degree does that correlate with what people call good or bad? It is determined by, through, and in the service of, culture, the status quo.
>>Are people easily brainwashed?
...yes. In fact, it is almost impossible to not be 'brainwashed.' Everyone believes more or less unconditionally the axioms of their society, to the point of even being blind to the fact that they exist.
>>Are people jealous they can't get the good good?
In general, if someone feels like they can't participate in something, they are liable to claim they believe that thing isn't good in the first place. This is 'sour grapes.' And yes, everyone genuinely prefers pleasure to pain (even though what some call pain others call pleasure) and since almost all people would receive pleasure if they smoked pot appropriately, almost everyone who denies they would like pot or that it is good for anyone is applying this natural 'sour grape' heuristic to explain their actions. But, good luck using that observation to change anything.
Charles Goodshaw - Tue, 07 Aug 2018 23:41:47 EST ID:A4CurNjr No.209425 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I dont know. When i was a kid i used to have this impression of weed smokers as being chill and friendly and a lot of them are.

But a lot of us are just ausitic unemployed gamers that get stoned way too much. Its disgusting and its worse when they constantly mention that they smoke. Get a life lol. Weed isnt a lifestyle it shoulf be treated like having a beer.
Fucking Gorringhudge - Wed, 08 Aug 2018 00:38:02 EST ID:2LwLwSlz No.209426 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1533703082374.jpg -(18618B / 18.18KB, 236x354) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>Weed isnt a lifestyle it shoulf be treated like having a beer.
Yeah people never treat bent out of shape over beer.

skepnihilosopy by Eliza Namblelock - Sun, 29 Jul 2018 16:02:30 EST ID:m46LHA5y No.209420 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1532894550027.png -(17722B / 17.31KB, 611x529) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 17722
what is value? what the fuck is value? Define value? what the fuck is it? intrisic, extrinsic, objective, subjective allll tauntologies... I did see anybody define value?
Oliver Clayway - Mon, 30 Jul 2018 17:51:42 EST ID:2LwLwSlz No.209422 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1532987502447.jpg -(25009B / 24.42KB, 300x259) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Everything is subjective and tautological, if you have a problem with that then philosophy is not for you. All knowledge can only be known from a perspective (and thus is subjective, no matter what anyone else may try to tell you) and it is tautological, because all knowledge or even all definition is interdependent on all other knowledge and definition and has no actual base. The human mind is pic related.

So, with that in mind, what the fuck 'value' is is exactly what it appears to be; a quantitative or qualitative representation of the worth or content of something. This duality comes from the fact that the english word value covers a couple of different meanings: to have a certain quality or worth, or to have an associated mathematical quantity. Both are abstractifications of the concept of worth or contents, but those concepts themselves, like all others, are ultimately subjective tautologies.
Cedric Nurringson - Wed, 01 Aug 2018 15:56:57 EST ID:uZGAHt28 No.209424 Ignore Report Quick Reply

Stirner on labor by Hamilton Grandway - Wed, 02 May 2018 09:41:48 EST ID:EQAAY6X6 No.209163 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1525268508445.jpg -(23124B / 22.58KB, 214x283) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 23124
Stirner knows literally nothing about labor or laborers. His ideas are juvenile. He thinks laborers are more powerful than businessmen/entrepreneurs. He’s wrong. The two are essentially equal in power, because the one cannot exist without the other. People like Stirner grossly under-estimate the intelligence of the entrepreneur and grossly over-estimate the simplicity of the laborer. I been in labor my entire life; seen tons of guys spend even 25 years straight happily laboring for good pay, because they’re simple and conservative and are much more focused on getting paid and going home to their families than becoming some sort of businessman or critical-thinker. These conservative family-oriented laborers are literally our backbone, and they always require leaders to guide them.
21 posts and 6 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Martin Claybanks - Wed, 04 Jul 2018 02:25:55 EST ID:yG540JtQ No.209315 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1530685555493.jpg -(491748B / 480.22KB, 1152x1500) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Thanks for reading my post and taking the time to respond. You have some very interesting insights. Its very much an updated version of dual power, or in your words "an alternative 'ghost' state. The temporary nature of communities that exist for a time then fall apart is certainly a major obstacle to long term networks and meaningful, radical change. Crimethinc had an interesting segment in the book Days of War, Nights of Love. I vaguely recall a campaign to unionize workers at a small college or something that brought alot of different sorts of people together in common cause. After a few minor upheavals and a liberating experience that led to getting their demands met, people moved on, and the connections that were made during that short campaign were lost. That was mid 2000s. So yeah, same problem.

The campaigns themselves form communities. The ability of Occupy Sandy to respond to the hurricane disaster was because of the networks in place right after Occupy.

Perhaps anarchists, or anti-authoritarians in general, shouldn't act in isolated groups separate from the general populace in the first place. If they truly want to act for the interest of those who suffer, they should know what needs to address. If they act for their selves that's cool too, just be honest about it, y'know? Outreach is really important though, to connect to the many communities that do exist, churches, hobby groups, longtime neighbors, and student groups for examples.

Popular assemblies could begin with core groups of dedicated individuals who do outreach to plug more people into the network while also doing practical actions that win small victories to demonstrate the effectiveness of such organizing.

A way around the self-centered thinking of what's best for myself, at least philosophically, is to see actions that benefit other people as also benefiting oneself, or even vice-versa sometimes, if self-improvement leads to greater ability to help others. For example, the tenants union getting city policy changed to require 90-day eviction notice instead of 30-days. That benefits the people who were a part of that campaign, a part of the tenants union, as well as every other renter.

These actions, institutions, and networks are totally going on in the background, but widely unnoticed. I guess that's a problem of outreach again. Although alot of people are constantly moving around from place to place, there's alot of people who remain where they are. The networks could continue on with regular gatherings or practical actions that reaffirm the networks, even though the individuals composed of the networks have changed over time. The Village Building Convergence is a great example of this. This could work if there was public exposure to a network and a simple way of plugging-in for new arrivals or those recently interested. An orientation to that specific cities' dynamic local politics per say.

The ROAR mag article tries to answer the problem of gentrification and moving populations:
>“Gentrification” comes nowhere close to describing the mass internal displacement taking place throughout the US. In San Francisco, a small, modest home costs about $3.5 to 4 million; simple one-bedroom apartments range from $3,500 to $15,000 per month to rent. Beneath the shimmering towers of tech billionaires, tent villages wedge precariously between the concrete pillars of highway underpasses. Meanwhile, the working poor are banished to isolated suburbs, where there is little street life and often no viable public transportation.
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
Martin Claybanks - Wed, 04 Jul 2018 02:51:34 EST ID:yG540JtQ No.209316 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1530687094493.gif -(1721293B / 1.64MB, 138x157) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Sucks there's a huge cultural gap. The only way i know how to address that gap is what i've been arguing, practical action & mutual aid basically. Bridging the divide is probably the most important answer to revitalizing a popular radical anti-authoritarian movement instead of as is, as a niche movement.
Shitting Donningfuck - Thu, 05 Jul 2018 05:38:22 EST ID:3eTL8f4N No.209333 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Cultural gap may not be the most accurate discription. Its about perspective, needs, priorities and the precarious nature of labor at this point. People need the fundamentals which is basically sustainable income. The ghost state cant really offer this, it seems like the project of volunteers and ultimately will be the product of people who have time and energy to volunteer in the first place. I mean, say you lose your job and dont have much hope in finding a new one, you go looking for the jobs that basically anyone can do so at least you can pay rent and sustain yourself, labouring for example or dishwashing. The impulse is not to think, "ok, lets find some vacant land to plant crops, squat a vacant building, go dumpster diving and work together with my local anarchist network"
If you see what im saying... while this ghost state can exist in the margins there must be some territory won from the capitalist state in order for it to offer a viable alternative and not just a voluntary safety net. I think one of the ideals of anarchism should always be to let people be autonomous materially, that is something capitalist states cannot tolerate.
Caroline Breshhood - Thu, 05 Jul 2018 13:33:44 EST ID:yG540JtQ No.209336 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1530812024026.png -(320419B / 312.91KB, 666x473) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Well said Donningfuck. Its difficult to be involved in these projects with little time on one's hands. I noticed with Free Hot Soup, which is composed of different coordinating groups that serve food three days a week, and occasionally elsewhere, alot of the volunteers have time to participate because either their retired, get social security, or work part-time and are able to meet their needs by living low-cost.

It doesn't help that cost of living has been increasing ridiculously high. For houseless folks one alternative has been self-governing camps, but most of those have been short-lived after being forcefully dispersed by law enforcement.

The support offered by libertarian institutions and networks would have to be accessible, and in some cases it is, if the person knows about it anyway. With the Free Store for example, a big one goes on each month at a church, but people can access the stuff there each week as well. When someone has material needs the networks and institutions are already in place to provide. Maybe the individual barely getting-by can't give their time to volunteer but they can at least utilize the resources.

>I think one of the ideals of anarchism should always be to let people be autonomous materially, that is something capitalist states cannot tolerate.
Totally. That's why there are incidents of law enforcement arresting people for serving free food, dispersing houseless camps, or raiding squats, among other examples.

You'd probably find the history of the 1980s Autonomen movement in Germany, who built social centers and squatted entire neighborhoods, really interesting. Now that the innercity is hip to live in again squatting really isn't a viable option for low-cost living, at least for many people. I'm not sure what territory so-to-speak could be won to make participation in these networks and institutions more viable. There are organizations pushing for higher wages, unionizing in specific businesses, rights to camp in certain areas, and rent caps, so that people in general are better off and not struggling to survive as bad as many are now. I really think people's belief and awareness in the effectiveness (or lack thereof) of the "ghost state" is a primary obstacle.

Fire and Flames: History of the German Autonomist Movement
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
Hedda Pittway - Thu, 26 Jul 2018 00:13:35 EST ID:RidPP7/o No.209418 Ignore Report Quick Reply
In my experience managers, employers, and entrepreneurs are the most deluded dumb ass children I've ever met. They consistently have no knowledge of the systems they own and profit from and so can only reason why they are on top is due to some nebulous character trait that often correlates with their childish nature.

My last CEO got in front of the entire company and literally congratulated himself for "having his head in the clouds". A friend's ex-employer asked if a 2 foot hole in a load bearing wall of a cooler holding product could be "painted over". These were both very successful businesses that were out competing and acquiring other companies despite their owners ignorance. Most if not all privately held companies would operate better if owners heads were removed.

Employers do nothing but demand a meter of how much profit they are making and cry when it's not high enough; leaving employees to figure out how to actually make that happen. When profit is high they feed their delusion lest they realize they injustice of their position.

/pss/ing away the days by Polly Segglepudge - Wed, 25 Jul 2018 18:05:45 EST ID:2LwLwSlz No.209417 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1532556345180.jpg -(37418B / 36.54KB, 600x400) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 37418
Why is it that the only two modes on /pss/ are:
>>Being blown out the ass by endless streams of tranny and helicopter ride baiting


>>Dead fucking silence

Are ennui and schadenfreude of such outsized value in our decadent collapsing imagewest that the only reason we can be arsed to slap our keyboards is if it hurts another miserable inhabitard? feelslikebatmantheanimatedseries
John Webblestone - Thu, 26 Jul 2018 15:35:12 EST ID:yG540JtQ No.209419 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1532633712551.jpg -(169747B / 165.77KB, 975x840) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>209417 Well, for me its time, again. I don't have the time (most of the time) to write deeply.

Looking at the first page most of the recent threads don't fit the above mold anyway.
Charlotte Demmlehork - Fri, 10 Aug 2018 14:58:18 EST ID:2LwLwSlz No.209428 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>don't fit the above mold anyway.
Do you agree with me now that this post is first of only three posts in the past 14 days?

On the subject of a diety, some nice writing by m7sha - Sat, 14 Jul 2018 19:53:25 EST ID:QsklVX/N No.209407 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1531612405351.jpg -(57455B / 56.11KB, 1024x794) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 57455
At any rate, I found this "message" in a relatively archaic databank and thought some of you might find it of interest. Then again, I'm often either bemused or startled at the items you find interesting. ....................

It's an article about a believable God

Beatrice Sallerham - Mon, 16 Jul 2018 18:32:33 EST ID:2LwLwSlz No.209409 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Interesting, but ultimately rather superficial. Tl,dr: turns out god is actually a machiavellian social darwinist who runs our pocket universe and hopes we will one day ascend to his level...even though he claims the path of technological progress is to stop trying to manipulate matter and only manipulate energy (which is nonsensical from a physics standpoint.) He also makes the claim that only violent predators are capable of intelligence...which is a little suspicious coming from the Almighty. I think the author could have conveyed their philosophical points more clearly without this framing device.
mika sha - Mon, 23 Jul 2018 14:57:19 EST ID:vEnuppAu No.209414 Ignore Report Quick Reply
He didn't say only violent predators are capable of intelligence, he said they die out before reaching the next "stage| of global consciousness as a race
Hugh Toothood - Mon, 23 Jul 2018 19:25:29 EST ID:2LwLwSlz No.209415 Ignore Report Quick Reply
No, that's the opposite of what is said. I think you need to read it a little more closely.
>>Without exception, intelligent species who gain dominance over their planet do so by becoming the most efficient predators.
>>Unlike the adaptors, who learn the point of cooperation fairly early on, manipulators battle on. And, once all lesser species have been overcome, they are so competitive and predatory that they are compelled to turn in on themselves....r this competition is vital to promote the leap from biological to technological evolution.

You need an arms race in order to make progress.

Your desire to dominate fuels a search for knowledge which the adaptors never acquire.
>>And although your initial desire for knowledge is selfish and destructive, it begins the development of an intellectual self awareness, a form of higher consciousness, which never emerges in any other species.
>> Not even while they are experiencing it, for example, can the intelligent adaptors - your dolphins - express the concepts of Love or Time.
Hugh Toothood - Mon, 23 Jul 2018 19:26:49 EST ID:2LwLwSlz No.209416 Ignore Report Quick Reply
That said, I think your misunderstanding is much closer to the truth than what this article suggests, which may be why you assumed that is what was meant. Violent competition is important for the success of our species, but cooperation is much more vital and more unique to intelligent life.

Baby elephants are the key to conservation funding by Henry Hugglestidge - Mon, 16 Jul 2018 16:39:03 EST ID:4irNhb1X No.209408 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1531773543458.jpg -(345529B / 337.43KB, 1180x897) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 345529
I think that when people are trying to raise money for elephant conservation, they should use lots of pictures of baby elephants, videos of baby elephants, and stories involving baby elephants.
Beatrice Sallerham - Mon, 16 Jul 2018 18:34:55 EST ID:2LwLwSlz No.209410 Ignore Report Quick Reply
When people are trying to raise money for poor countries, they show lots of pictures of starving baby humans. How much of a greater effect do you think that has?

If you're insensitive to suffering in the first place, how much more sensitive will you be merely because something is young? Many great relevant examples of this in modern times...
Archie Surringbudge - Tue, 17 Jul 2018 00:54:52 EST ID:ogjfl7YN No.209411 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Most animal conservation plays on the disproportionate empathy we feel for animals with natal features.

The hierarchy is:
Human Baby -> Anything that reminds us of Human Babies -> Human Adults -> Anything that reminds us of Human Adults -> Anything that does neither

Abstract discussion thread by Fuck Drollerlick - Thu, 12 Jul 2018 02:01:21 EST ID:QfvuJGLY No.209398 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1531375281147.png -(422798B / 412.89KB, 1440x2692) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 422798
My brain is the same as your brain except for the fact that your brain functions entirely unlike mine even though assuming we both fit the parameters for having a "normally" formed brain and posses a healthy neural structure that is supposed to control certain aspects of our psychology and physiology in the same matter.
Phyllis Covingbod - Thu, 12 Jul 2018 22:33:22 EST ID:2LwLwSlz No.209402 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1531449202833.gif -(2052502B / 1.96MB, 500x500) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Two oaks have completely different limb configurations yet are both healthy oaks. Two snowflakes are utterly unalike yet created by the exact same forces.
The categories the mind imposes on the world are a blanket fort against unvarnished chaos.
Ernest Pongerson - Thu, 12 Jul 2018 22:45:45 EST ID:ogjfl7YN No.209404 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1531449945310.jpg -(25752B / 25.15KB, 680x380) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>assuming we both fit the parameters for having a "normally" formed brain

You know what they say about assumptions.

Uniqueness & Alienation by Hedda Turveycocke - Mon, 09 Jul 2018 01:14:32 EST ID:yG540JtQ No.209363 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1531113272985.jpg -(546490B / 533.68KB, 800x988) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 546490
"You -- unique! What thought content is here, what sentence content? None! Whoever wants to deduce a precise thought-content of the Unique as if it were a concept, whoever thinks that with "unique" one has said about you what you are, would show that they believe in phrases, because they don't recognize phrases as phrases, and would also show that they seek specific content in phrases.

You, inconceivable and inexpressible, are the phrase content, the phrase owner, the phrase embodied; you are the who, the one of the phrase. In the unique, science can dissolve into life, in which your this becomes who and this who no longer seeks itself in the word, in the Logos, in the attribute.

The unique in Heaven, which Feuerbach places beside the unique on earth, is the phrase without a phrase-owner. The unique considered here is God. This is the thing that guaranteed that religion would last, that it had the unique at least in thought and as a phrase, that it saw it in Heaven. But the heavenly unique is only a unique in which no one has an interest, whereas Feuerbach instead, whether he likes it or not, is interested in Stirner's unique, because he would have to treat it oddly, if he wanted to chase his own unique from his head. If the heavenly unique were one that existed in its own head rather than in Feuerbach's, it would be difficult to chase this unique from its head."

Feuerbach would separate theology from speculative philosophy, finding in it the key to understanding man's uniqueness from nature even though man is a part of nature, anthropology. For "consciousness is given only in the case of a being to whom his species, his mode of being, is necessarily linked with knowledge. This makes consciousness again into something specifically human, because the animal is not capable of knowing. In being conscious, man knows himself as this conscious being: He is to himself an object of thought. But a being who is an object of his thought; a self-knowing being is also an other-knowing being. Because of this span, knowledge has the character of science: 'Science is the consciousness of species.' "

From the introduction of Fiery Brook, Zawar Hanfi distinguish…
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
30 posts and 27 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Albert Nicklebanks - Mon, 09 Jul 2018 19:14:39 EST ID:2LwLwSlz No.209394 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I don't wanna hijack your thread by moving it to discuss what I was saying, I just wanted to give you something to mull over that was somewhat related to what you were saying, but I'll respond to your points as I think they're relevant to the general topic of developing a forward thinking paradigm for philosophy and human society.

>>Sounds quite a transcendence of human nature.
That's one possible interpretation. However, one thing I would ask, is human nature specific or unique to homo sapiens? Did australopithecus, even at a reduced level, not participate in what we think of as 'human nature' i.e. to be both sentient and sapient, self aware, yet still an animal? So I think it's reasonable to think that as we evolve, what we evolve into will still be a 'human being' in the original sense of that term, a sapient entity that feels, thinks, yet exists materially, even if they aren't members of the specific species homo s. sapiens.

>wouldn't humanity still be beholden to the constraints of their environment?
Exactly. Technology enables us to feel and be responsive to the constraints of the environment in ways that used to be impossible. I know it seems grim right now, but you have to look at the bigger picture.

Formerly, because of the dichotomy between the self and the environment human consciousness created by being self aware, we saw the environment as separate from ourselves and thus initially believed crazy things like we had the unlimited right to subjugate and control it. As we change the environment more drastically, we begin to directly feel the consequences on the biosphere after a very short time (for example, anthropogenic climate change.) In short order (on a cosmic timescale anyway) we begin the mentally integrate the components of the world system into our mental models. The dissolution of the barrier between subject and object, self and environment, is a two-way street. We're the first part of the biosphere that is aware of the biosphere and is able to adapt to it, and it to us. Consider how early life destroyed the ecosystem many times over through its unawareness of the constraints of the environment (for examp…
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
Barnaby Heshfare - Wed, 11 Jul 2018 22:00:30 EST ID:yG540JtQ No.209396 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1531360830421.jpg -(2007013B / 1.91MB, 1500x2121) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Its cool, as if i (or anyone) possess this thread anyway.

>However, one thing I would ask, is human nature specific or unique to homo sapiens?
Good point. I don't know at what point someone would consider human nature to be absent, or for that matter, present in earlier homo species. Are you suggesting biological evolution and/or a technologically augmented human?

>because of the dichotomy between the self and the environment human consciousness created by being self aware, we saw the environment as separate from ourselves and thus initially believed crazy things like we had the unlimited right to subjugate and control it.
If you study early human history and pre-history or even look at existing human society's right now that are considered primitive from our late-modern perspective, many of those societies don't view the world as something to control with the right to subjugate it. Their mythologies and belief systems were often about being a part of the sum total world, not as some separate objective species apart from it.

Often the different societies' belief systems used the concepts of God(s) to characterize unexplainable phenomenon and posit their place in the world. Such as Coyote, the trickster, who figures predominantly in many First Nations tribes throughout North America. He is unpredictable and ambivalent, representing both good and bad, animals, humans, and gods, a characteristic of all these beings. "By testing and pushing the limits of behavior, he demonstrates and reinforces concepts of harmony and order for the Navajo."

In the Navajo's creation myth Coyote was responsible for their great flood, from pieces of his fur are made all coyotes, different colors for the four different directions, sometimes he's associated with meanness and uncontrollable sexual passion. He sanctifies Sun, Moon, corn and plants, insists on the mountains being given life, he gives names to Talking God and Calling God, two major Navajo deities, "and in his capacity as a wise philosopher is responsible for the ordering of what are now regarded by Navajos as proper and necessary life patterns, [...] such as crop growing[.]" So despite Coyote's trickster characteristics, the impression in the Navajo creation myths is much more of the Cultural Hero than the Trickster.
http://www3.brandonu.ca/cjns/7.2/cooper.pdf COYOTE IN NAVAJO RELIGION AND COSMOLOGY

The belief of having the right to subjugate nature often emerged with civilizations, monotheism, and the state, so its not necessarily a western attitude.
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
Barnaby Heshfare - Wed, 11 Jul 2018 23:20:21 EST ID:yG540JtQ No.209397 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1531365621421.jpg -(717699B / 700.88KB, 683x900) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Of the post linked to, in >>209396 about ecopsychology, the quote:
>"To make contact with present reality, however, is also to confront the painful feelings that are masked or numbed-out by our technological mode of living. So learning to collectively bear, find meaning in, and move through the suffering we inevitably uncover in the course of counterpractise is essential."
is supposed to have an endquote " at the end of the second sentence there.

>That could be group therapy, carthatic events like shows or protests, to take action, to attend carefully to relationships, symbolic rites of passage through different stages of our lives, and honor the growth or sacred unfolding of things, reconnecting with nature outside (the world) and inside (our self), whatever works and seems right.
is my attempt to summarize suggestions from a few pages with my own skew, which both miss plenty of unknown alternatives, to overcome society's overarching apathetic malaise.
Phyllis Covingbod - Thu, 12 Jul 2018 22:17:47 EST ID:2LwLwSlz No.209401 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1531448267833.jpg -(47448B / 46.34KB, 575x768) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>Are you suggesting biological evolution and/or a technologically augmented human?
Definitely a both/and scenario. Although once we start changing our own genome Darwinian forces will act on us on a higher order, I think ultimately we will become more, rather than less, responsive to it. I think human evolution will definitely eventually go the way of merger with the machine, but one not necessarily need think that to believe that as we evolve we will have to become more integrated with our environment, whether as organic, synthetic, or hybrid beings.

>> many of those societies don't view the world as something to control with the right to subjugate it.
Agreed, however, I think we can also see from the history of interaction between peoples at different modes of production (i.e. between hunter-gatherers and agriculturalists, agriculurtalists and industrialists, etc.) that there is a convergent trend in human societies to an 'othering' mode of consciousness, primarily because of the uni-directional nature of technological progress. Even as pre-linguistic hunter gatherers, we might not have had the idea that we had unlimited right to use the land, but for example we believed often that our use of fire was endorsed divinely, and so spread a technology that (minutely by today's standards, but still measurably) set our species on a collision course with environmental calamity (agriculture and the fertility gods of the fertile crescent and its subsequent collapse being another good example.)

However, clearly some myths are better than other to inculcate positive values. Nature abhors a vacuum, and in a valueless system people will cling to the things that provide the cheapest return on their value reward system. It's the responsibility of people who can see the danger in this to instill a positive value system -- even if it means broaching the icky topic of instilling myths (in the ideological, rather than conspiratorial, sense.)

But definitely not exclusively a western phenomena, agreed. The modern west is just the most egregious example in the most advanced stage of a civilization undergoing this process, which is most likely universal.

>> I've gotten that impression during hallucinogenic experiences
FWIW, (and having had the same myself) people have had similar impressions without the aid of hallucinogens, so hopefully there is some truth to it.

>>Wont there always be a divide of self though? The physical separation of our skin from the environment and nothing more...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
Cyril Wipperfield - Fri, 13 Jul 2018 04:31:20 EST ID:yG540JtQ No.209406 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1531470680674.jpg -(497230B / 485.58KB, 900x658) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>Even as pre-linguistic hunter gatherers, we might not have had the idea that we had unlimited right to use the land, but for example we believed often that our use of fire was endorsed divinely, and so spread a technology that (minutely by today's standards, but still measurably) set our species on a collision course with environmental calamity (agriculture and the fertility gods of the fertile crescent and its subsequent collapse being another good example.)
First Nations people used controlled fires to clear brush for growing crops in the wild. Even with technologically limited human people (by our present day standards) specialized and knew how to utilize their environment with the tools available to them, yet had a harmonious understanding of how and why to live as a part of nature.

Collapse is a great book studying past civilizations' factors that led to their calamity. Often it is from a sudden lack unsustaining of a concentration of people. Throughout history civilizations have risen and fallen and within the gaps of knowledge as to why, are many potential reasons. Perhaps revolt, or starvation, and/or migration, certainly a severing of trade (or transportation) of one's necessities.

I'll have to mull over other points, but:
>Nowadays, the best ways of accomplishing that are either societal engineering like you're suggesting, which is always difficult because you're trying to induce a new state of consciousness in society while the old one is still in effect, or are methods only useful briefly and are dangerous or difficult, like drugs or mental techniques.
I think of a heightened state of awareness and altered mode of perspective, or whatever, (sober) in relation to our way of life and other ways of life, is an individual path people choose to follow. Not something you can engineer in people, as if we're not unique with our own realized and unknown self right now. I don't think technology can reveal this awareness or perspective, the same way thinking will.

trans by Shit Bunson - Thu, 12 Jul 2018 07:12:24 EST ID:VGeeHEV+ No.209399 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1531393944776.jpg -(70633B / 68.98KB, 586x680) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 70633
i posted this on /b/ earlier but the thread got locked after a few minutes so i'm coming here

basically i just spent most of yesterday reading articles about transgenderism as a whole

i had a negative perception of the whole thing before but i now realize that the fact that this mess has been allowed to attain the least bit of mainstrean acceptance and credibility is a downright travesty
this is not a medical mistake at the magnitude of lobotomy
it's way worse and if we don't stop this soon thousands of insecure and mentally ill youth will experience a horrible death at the hand of themselves, helped by the legions of psychologists and surgeons who are willing to ignore studies on the subject that very clearly paints a picture of transpeople as having severe psychological problems that will persist even after SRS

before today I thought that it was ok to call transpeople "freaks" and ridicule them
not anymore as i realize doing so would only fuel their movement which i now know has to be stopped at all costs

SRS needs to be banned asap as does transgenderism being classified as anything but the mental illness gender dysphoria

these people (most of whom grow out of this as long as they aren't encouraged to destroy their own bodies) are in dire need of psychiatric help
Beatrice Ponderchere - Thu, 12 Jul 2018 19:41:43 EST ID:ogjfl7YN No.209400 Ignore Report Quick Reply
There are like 2 other threads about trans people on the front page here. Why not use them?
Phyllis Covingbod - Thu, 12 Jul 2018 22:42:25 EST ID:2LwLwSlz No.209403 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Dear low quality troll, you have just demonstrated to yourself how easy it is to radicalize yourself reading propaganda that is designed specifically to radicalize you. This is apparently what you are railing against in others...even though you are admitting it is what you just did to yourself.

>>severe psychological problems that will persist even after SRS
people who have open heart surgery still have severe cardiac problems that persist after surgery. Where do you get this idea that a therapy for a problem removes a problem completely?

>>are in dire need of psychiatric help
As a rule, those who make it to SRS have already received hundreds if not thousands of hours of psychiatric help. They're the ones who recommend the procedure. Maybe you should do some research not from totally biased sources so you can at least know what the fuck you're talking about before you declare your little jihad?

It's a good thing society doesn't turn on your little imaginary crusades, because nothing is going to reverse the state of medical care for trans people, and even political attempts to stall progress are faltering in the 'last, best hope' for close-minded reactionaries, 'Murkur, where shadows fall...
Cyril Wipperfield - Fri, 13 Jul 2018 03:57:56 EST ID:yG540JtQ No.209405 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>209399 My sole thought is of all there is to focus on in the world, why this?
Sophie Beshbedging - Sat, 21 Jul 2018 07:44:15 EST ID:4+oWREai No.209413 Ignore Report Quick Reply
You're stupid. That's the only reply that you deserve. Get lost.

Rape is an equivalent crime to adultery by George Brepperdock - Mon, 02 Jul 2018 20:02:42 EST ID:jcTfBHx5 No.209306 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1530576162738.jpg -(284750B / 278.08KB, 1051x951) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 284750
On a primal psychological and biological level, rape takes away a woman's right to choose the genes of her mate while adultery takes away a man's right to choose who he provides resources for. Most women (and men for that matter) consider raping a woman to be a crime more heinous than murder. Most men consider getting stallioned as their biggest fear. In both cases, these are crimes of an evolutionary nature. It explains why women get so traumatized when they're raped, while it's just standard operating procedure for men in prison. It also explains why men typically seem to care far more about their woman cheating than vice-versa.

Rape has the added element of verbal or physical coercion, that's true. But we already have laws for that: assault and battery. We don't have a separate law for, say, coercing someone to eat a bunch of eggs. The only case in which we do this is when physical threats/violence are used to gain access to a woman's holes because deep down, we all know that is their most valuable possession. Moreover, for all intents and purposes (and in some countries in the actual letter of the law) rape is a crime that can only be perpetrated on women.

Yet look at how adultery is treated in America. It's legal in all 50 states, while rape carries not just legal punishments, but can effectively destroy your entire life if you so much as get accused of this. Consider if the roles were reverse. How would you feel if women got imprisoned for committing rape while a guy who sleeps around just has slightly more streamlined divorce proceedings? Seems silly right?

I'm not saying rape is in any way a good thing. But we need to either bring back the criminal penalties for divorce or remove the penalties for rape (while solidifying the penalties for coercion) because the way it is now simply isn't just.
41 posts and 20 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Simon Cillernodging - Sun, 08 Jul 2018 11:01:46 EST ID:4+oWREai No.209358 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I can't believe there exists a thread in which people are actually debating that rape isn't harmful. That's pretty low-brow even for this board.
Thomas Hammerwater - Sun, 08 Jul 2018 20:32:35 EST ID:ogjfl7YN No.209359 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Eh, it's just one guy who has no idea what he's talking about but doesn't know when to quit.

I can bring this back to philosophy:
If rape were not inherently traumatic for the victim, would there be more or less rape in the world?
Albert Nicklebanks - Sun, 08 Jul 2018 21:30:27 EST ID:2LwLwSlz No.209360 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Essentially, are the majority of rapes rape for it's own ends, or rape for the purpose of inflicting trauma?

I'd be inclined to think the former, as people are more likely to be merely greedy and careless about the boundaries of others than truly sociopathic. But there's probably some concrete data on this.
Thomas Hammerwater - Sun, 08 Jul 2018 23:28:44 EST ID:ogjfl7YN No.209361 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>Essentially, are the majority of rapes rape for it's own ends, or rape for the purpose of inflicting trauma?

Well that's one set of questions, but the other is whether trauma itself is what makes rape difficult to report and get justice for.

I heard the point from Zizek that we authenticate guilt by detail, but we authenticate trauma by lack of detail. Ie, if someone calmly walks through the technical description of what happened to them, we emotionally distrust that narrative. However, if they are so overwhelmed by the experience that they can't even say what happened, there is less evidence to go on.
Albert Nicklebanks - Mon, 09 Jul 2018 00:33:41 EST ID:2LwLwSlz No.209362 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>whether trauma itself is what makes rape difficult to report and get justice for.
Possibly, and quite probably, but I'm not sure it would be the biggest contributor to the underreporting -- I imagine that would be shame, and fear that one would not be taken seriously (thus sociological rather than psychological reasons.)

Consider for how much of human history (i.e. to this day in parts of the world) the victim of rape is murdered or otherwise ostracized, and even in the west, how quickly (frequently male) police will go to the 'well what were you wearing? did you lead him on? How many drinks did you have?' angle. Women in particular are socialized to minimize the discomfort of others by taking up as little space as possible, which also certainly contributes both to their lack of being taken seriously and the belief that they won't be taken seriously, a vicious cycle.

It would probably take a very carefully designed and complex study to suss out exactly how much of the underreporting each of these factors contributes to, though.

business discussion by Sophie Giddlehall - Sat, 30 Jun 2018 23:49:10 EST ID:Wdy2/dMQ No.209301 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1530416950031.jpg -(101732B / 99.35KB, 1200x800) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 101732
hey guys me and a few friends from uni investment class have created an anonchat group to discuss capitalism, investing and business in general where we share knowledge amonst ourselves.

if you are a serious capitalist and can repay the insights you get, you will be welcome. no idiots allowed though.

we are more interested in value investing and real business stuff, plebs who like technical analysis, derivative blockchain shit and dropshipping will be mocked.

it's in #biz at http://getanonchat.com
Sophie Giddlehall - Sun, 01 Jul 2018 18:54:27 EST ID:Wdy2/dMQ No.209304 Ignore Report Quick Reply
WTF is the problem with technical analysis?
William Dodgeshaw - Fri, 06 Jul 2018 10:46:23 EST ID:Wdy2/dMQ No.209342 Ignore Report Quick Reply
none. it works fine.
Ernest Cingerwane - Fri, 06 Jul 2018 16:24:15 EST ID:2LwLwSlz No.209352 Ignore Report Quick Reply
We have IDs here. We all know you're just talking to yourself.
Oliver Drivingdale - Mon, 09 Jul 2018 22:18:51 EST ID:wAsGqCt+ No.209395 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Edwin Beppercocke - Wed, 08 Aug 2018 07:32:19 EST ID:iifXBMLG No.209427 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Thank christ? Getting sick of all these crypto socialists dominating the internet like a bad tumour

Pith, Banter, and Motivation "BELIEVE IN THE YOU YOU BELIEVE IN!" by James Genningfack - Tue, 26 Jun 2018 15:54:42 EST ID:65NWSo4c No.209299 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1530042882103.png -(611668B / 597.33KB, 1600x900) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 611668
How would you explain the phenomenon of pithy and witty comments usually being derogatory or critical of the subject in question? Whether it's schoolyard banter or a spat between bar-patrons, why is "pith" so overused in the realm of the critical? Wouldn't it be more useful for pith to be used for uplifting and upending comments about someone or something, take the character Kamina, he constantly uplifts the main character Simon in an almost obtuse and unreal way. I feel like this would be where the real potential of pith and banter lies, in raising up your fellows, not putting them down. Or, am I really just trying to tackle an underlying problem of our society as a whole, the contrarian put-downs that plague our conversations and daily lives instead of us all living life to our best abilities and to the fullest, motivating each other.
Martha Pamblelock - Tue, 26 Jun 2018 17:51:41 EST ID:2LwLwSlz No.209300 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Well I think you're conflating a lot of different problems which is why you're getting confused.
For one thing, there's already a term for positive pithiness. It's 'patronizing.' People don't like it much either. Generally in order for motivation to be received as it is intended, there needs to be a balanced power (or at least respect) relationship between the sender and the receiver, and so pithiness and patronization are equally disqualifying.

But, you're right that culture is currently under a plague of contrarian nihilism. We can see this as an inevitable symptom of post-modern malaise, but I can assure you it is nothing more than a fad. I anticipate earnestness will become popular again within 5-10 years, at which point nihilistic 'ironic' contrarianism will be viewed as we do a Flock of Seagulls haircut today.
Lillian Trotbury - Sun, 01 Jul 2018 05:31:44 EST ID:AhoY0+HB No.209302 Ignore Report Quick Reply
IMO earnestness is already coming back around as a valued trait. everyone got sick of the nihilist bullshit pretty quick at least in my circle, all it does is downplay actual mental illness while making everyone look like a little bitch who can't deal with any of their own problems without posting a meme about it on facebook about drinking themselves half to death.. and then don't even go out and drink themselves to death

what is the point? its gotten so bad where I feel like I need to have an opinion on everything lest I be seen as one of these modern nihilists who "just cant be arsed" to cast a vote based on 15 minutes of research.

I agree with this guy OP, earnestness is going to come back, and it will come back strong, as the economy slowly recovers and people slowly realize, "hey, wait, I can survive with this job making X / hour, I don't have much else of a choice other than doing heroin until I die, so I might as well go work"

most people dont really believe all that nihilist, suicidal garbage at all.

more on topic to your post OP, I think that subversion of positive comments will continue mostly unabashed amongst strangers, acquaintances, and comedy / pop culture because its borne of sarcasm, which is a good tool to make light of a bad situation, and because we gain a sick sense of camaraderie from hearing that our peers have some things worse off than us.

If everyone only went around giving each other legitimate compliments.. I don't know. I think I would like to see what that world looks like. But I don't think I would want to live in it. It sounds a little sterile, if you know what I mean. Maybe I'm too indoctrinated by our current norms to possibly fit in, but it seems like it would devalue the happiness or satisfaction you feel when you do get a real compliment.

not everyone gets along, and thats probably an unavoidable fact, so its a good thing IMO to have a sharp, potent reward for stumbling upon a group of people who are all really into the same thing as you, eg, acceptance in the place of light mockery
Hamilton Pucklelure - Sun, 01 Jul 2018 16:33:35 EST ID:kiUYn++k No.209303 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Nihilism is babby's first realization of the total nothingness that underlies the human imaginary. It opens a rupture that allows us to, for the first time, actually question the knowledge we've received. It let's us say, "hey, wait a sec, the pastor who told me that God wrote the Bible and wants us to interpret it literally was just straight up bullshitting me." It's an important realization, but it can't stop there.

You have to define your own values, and I think people actually are beginning to do so. That's what the transvaluation of values is all about. Recognizing the void that underlies them while choosing the ones which you can actually have faith in, which could make the world (or just your own individual existence) better off.

The important thing is that nihilism is a necessary step toward self-creation. You have to burn yourself up in order to rise from the ashes like a phoenix.
Beatrice Hudgebury - Wed, 04 Jul 2018 20:40:08 EST ID:ogjfl7YN No.209321 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1530751208141.png -(133066B / 129.95KB, 768x1024) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Because such wit relies on provoking an emotional reaction in order to draw attention to the quality of the wordplay.

By the same token, the punchline of a wordy, sophisticated joke should always be a swear word or exposed genitalia.

Pages Next>>
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report Post
Please be descriptive with report notes,
this helps staff resolve issues quicker.