AnonAccount: What is it, and what does it do? - Q&A Thread
Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
Name
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
Subject
Comment
[*]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
File

Sandwich


i just whored it up by Betsy Suttinglat - Tue, 16 Sep 2014 15:08:11 EST ID:Imxo7Xk0 No.195859 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
1410894491228.jpg -(77616 B, 500x561) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 77616
I have a philosopilcal bomb for you
>your on a trolley car and the brakes are out
>In front of you are 3 railway worker who will be killed if you do nothing
>on the other track you can turn to in order to avoid the 3 workers there are 6 midget railway workers and a bologna sandwich

What do you choose /pss/
>>
Doris Dirringman - Tue, 16 Sep 2014 16:04:52 EST ID:1heTqcJX No.195860 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>195859


do nothing, are you kidding?

>ruining a good sandwich
>>
Matilda Drallytut - Tue, 16 Sep 2014 16:04:55 EST ID:Im1aT5e5 No.195861 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Awwww shit
>>
Ian Hoddleway - Mon, 06 Oct 2014 00:04:57 EST ID:M+LWFwC9 No.196092 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>OP, you forgot the video that goes with it!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBdfcR-8hEY


Holes in economic thought and theory by Nell Brabblehood - Sun, 05 Oct 2014 20:41:21 EST ID:cojBGgl6 No.196088 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
1412556081494.png -(299089 B, 500x375) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 299089
It just feels as if we're missing a general perspective on economics that we once used to have. This is the thread to post facts, theories, figures, and philosophies of important economic thinkers in the past that we may not be paying attention to today.

For instance, whatever happened to the first law of Adam Smith's 'five variations in pecuniary compensation resulting from the variations from the employments themselves'? That first law was that we compensate the wages of laborers and the profits of stock based on the general dirtiness or uncleanliness of the profession or employment, respectively. We clearly do not follow that reasoning today, many professions that are unwholesome or generally unpleasant are under compensated based on this economic line of thought.

There is another Smithian line of thought, while a bit more sociological and less economical, may have some contribution the varying degrees of payment and credibility certain educational institutions have today: "Whatever forces a certain number of students to any college or university, independent of the merit or reputation of the teachers, tends more or less to diminish the necessity of that merit or reputation".

We see that, partially, in how easy it is these days to receive their lectures online through coursera or a similar site. Why then, do colleges and universities still get paid so much for their tuition? If I didn't know any better I would say the educational problem Adam Smith outlined right there in that single phrase is enough to warrant some attention. Instead of valuing WHAT people are being taught, we value moreso WHERE they are being taught it. Self-education, however, can in some cases be even moreso efficacious than taught education.
>>
Molly Criffingdodging - Sun, 05 Oct 2014 21:26:32 EST ID:FqJYi18c No.196089 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>We clearly do not follow that reasoning today, many professions that are unwholesome or generally unpleasant are under compensated based on this economic line of thought.

I think the reasoning today is more along the lines that we compensate people based on how valuable they as individuals are. An individual garbage collector is not valuable - he is easy to replace with a similarly qualified individual because being a garbage collector does require much in the way of qualifications. There are literally billions of people who could do the job of a garbage collector. A rock-star software developer IS valuable (most of the time) because his qualifications put him in a group of people that is at least three to five orders of magnitude smaller - tens of thousands in the entire world at most, and there are many 50 such developers in any given city. And how many of those developers are seeking work right now? Not many. Perhaps 1 or 2.

Labour costs are ruled by supply and demand and intervention by external forces just like every other commodity.

>Why then, do colleges and universities still get paid so much for their tuition?

Because what's worth the money is the piece of paper saying that you have the qualifications you do. What's worth the money is the implicit trust someone can put in you - when you say that you are qualified in a certain way, they have better reason to believe you. A degree from a respectable institution says that a bunch of very smart people who know your shit believe that YOU know your shit. That alone is worth something. Maybe not as much as institutions these days are charging for it.
>>
Molly Criffingdodging - Sun, 05 Oct 2014 21:27:28 EST ID:FqJYi18c No.196090 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>196089
there are maybe 50 such...*
>>
Nell Brabblehood - Sun, 05 Oct 2014 23:52:48 EST ID:cojBGgl6 No.196091 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>196089
This answer, although perhaps fine, does not placate my qualms about the current wages of labor, which are being skewed towards indolent white collar professions.

But regardless, I thank you for the answer.


Progress by Sophie Sosslenut - Fri, 03 Oct 2014 09:23:01 EST ID:10eS65U3 No.196064 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
1412342581345.jpg -(114307 B, 1600x1200) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 114307
So guys what defines progress?
Is technology progressful, do you think it could backfire? Is something that succeeds and then backfires progress?
Any allegories about progress?
2 posts and 1 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Edwin Hinnerford - Fri, 03 Oct 2014 18:34:13 EST ID:7sJ/68Ak No.196069 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>196067

Now instead of having icky poopy in the rivers we drink out of and bathe in we have devastated and poisoned oceans

Progress
>>
Beatrice Cushherk - Sat, 04 Oct 2014 09:50:01 EST ID:O2x9RNNL No.196074 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>196069
No doubt, we are trashing the joint.
Like I said, good/bad I dont know. I can keep comparing though.
Subscribe to evolution? We used to be fish.
Again, I think I like being a human, compared to fish.
We get music, love...spices. Though maybe fish get something better.

And I think if we put our minds to it we could at the very least clean up the place.
>>
Ravenfrost !8NBuQ4l6uQ - Sun, 05 Oct 2014 13:26:46 EST ID:fwtQsfWg No.196081 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1412530006463.jpg -(60497 B, 600x600) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 60497
True progress is defined by one's inability to contradict inertia, with whatever means or propellant is used to disembark from such sad realities, ergo no one is moving in a straight line, every one is a dot on a map lighting up, one by one
>>
Angus Ninnerham - Sun, 05 Oct 2014 13:49:09 EST ID:N0ZAuKNY No.196083 Ignore Report Quick Reply
This is a social sciences board and you are asking what progress is?

It's a concept that can have various attributes depending on who is talking about it.

At the moment it seems to be on technology and economy, but if you look at but Bhutan, they measure growth in happiness.

So anything can be seen as progress depending upon your goals, ruralists see progress in throwing down technology.
>>
Nicholas Feblingworth - Sun, 05 Oct 2014 19:47:35 EST ID:5q+Zf1cH No.196084 Ignore Report Quick Reply
People tend to apply the label "progress" with regards to their own goals and aims, so "progress" is subjective. A change that for one person might be progress, might be a setback for another.


Tyrany Vs God by Charlotte Diffingstetch - Sat, 04 Oct 2014 01:10:52 EST ID:Ae0/pI3/ No.196071 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
1412399452998.jpg -(98329 B, 780x624) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 98329
The bible states :Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.

However what if suddenly communists took over the world and made it a mandatory law to worship the devil?

Do you go to hell for worshiping the devil or go to hell for rebelling against what god wants? Does the devil become god? Does the communist leader become all three?
2 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Clara Ciblingsedging - Sat, 04 Oct 2014 20:02:33 EST ID:Ae0/pI3/ No.196076 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>196075

So its pretty much you dont have to follow every law even though it says you do so long as your reason is justified? I still see this as a contradiction.

How would we know that all the people sent to the furnace didnt go to hell? It says directly "For there is no authority except from God". Which means god wanted them to worship the statue. If god can manifest himself as human how do we know that the person who the statue represented wasnt god as well?
>>
Graham Cronderbitch - Sat, 04 Oct 2014 23:27:41 EST ID:PPbAMfpd No.196077 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>196076
it seems lie your looing for a reason to justify not having faith in god. i forget the details but there was a story about jesus and those who followed him traveling around in the east preaching the gospel of god. he was on a ship and he had just tought his followers that dying is not the end and that having faith in him is having security in death. then they traveled by boat and jesus rested and while he was asleep made a huge storm trap the boat they were on and there was rocking so fierce that the boat was liable to break into peices. His followers were screaming an crying scared to die then suddenly jesus woke and said why do you say you would die for me and face death and cower at the sight or thought of it. death is nothing, but the begining of the second life. those who are truly faithful in christ would easily die if it was there eternal life up for wager. eternal life vs. eternal death hmm what to do.
>>
Phineas Hessledudging - Sun, 05 Oct 2014 03:05:52 EST ID:u+wIIp7U No.196078 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>196077

>it seems lie your looing

teehee
>>
Faggy Sovingdedge - Sun, 05 Oct 2014 05:44:52 EST ID:uDAV1e3q No.196079 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>196076
Paul is talking about obedience to civil laws, not religious laws. Paul was willing to disobey the authorities on matters of religion and he was put in prison for his religious views. At the time he wrote the epistle to the Romans there had been riots and pogroms, and Paul was concerned that the Christians in Rome did not give the authorities any reason to attack them. He wanted Christians to live peacefully in the state not fight against it. Jews and Christians were minorities that would have been very vulnerable during civil unrest in the Roman empire. This is why Paul is so keen to avoid any sort of civil unrest. When Paul tells people not to resist the authorities he is talking about not starting riots or plotting revolution, he is not saying that Christians should follow the Roman's religion.

Similarly, the Jews in exile in Babylon lived peacefully within the state but kept to their own religion and continued worshiping God. When Nebuchadnezzar tried to force Daniel's friends to worship the statue they didn't resist violently, they just refused and accepted that they would be executed. They kept faith in God and they were saved as a result. The statue did not represent God, the Bible is very clear all the way through that you shouldn't worship idols, it represents the gods of the Babylonians. When Daniel's friends survive being put in the furnace, it shows that God's power is real and the Babylonian gods' power is not.

The Babylonians believed that they had conquered the Jews through their own power, but the Bible makes it clear that the power that the Babylonians had was given to them by God. This is also what Paul is saying about the Roman empire, so the message is consistent.
>>
Wesley Hurringkud - Sun, 05 Oct 2014 11:47:15 EST ID:vFpEa1Nb No.196080 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>196079
This. He's saying that civil and religious authorities *can* live side by side. Render unto Ceasar what is Ceasar's. That's not saying that all authority is good, just that it's not necessarily bad.


You are it by Lillian Giffingfuck - Sat, 12 Apr 2014 23:44:50 EST ID:xMmvmjRR No.192845 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
1397360690281.jpg -(104034 B, 600x720) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 104034
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcPWU59Luoc
10 posts and 2 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Cornelius Wicklekudging - Sat, 03 May 2014 00:34:31 EST ID:Lhp1yiVw No.193318 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>192845
this is what i made up when i was 16 (but i made less inconsistencies because i had no pleb audience); but now i'm cool, edgy, and chill
>>
Simon Dandletire - Mon, 05 May 2014 04:20:24 EST ID:KHq6GlIc No.193338 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>192845

Be that as it may, the mental suffering never ends and that idea is only fooling the brain into thinking that you're somehow special and have the power to do things. Reality is far from that and that's why society is how it is today.
>>
James Sovinggold - Mon, 05 May 2014 16:17:03 EST ID:d1wkdiSv No.193347 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>192946
I'm not going to deny any truth behind this statement as I can relate personal experiences to this sentiment. However this is still an opinion not qualitative evidence to support a claim we, as mere mortals cannot support with quantitative data and it also remains disputable. I have held conversations with several characters and also reflected with those who seek to overcome the insufferable power of de;ath and live forever in this reality; the reality that they perceive within the ether: This is a hardly a lesser spiritual concept to taking shit loads of psychs and feeling one with the world.
>>
Molly Mebbertidge - Fri, 03 Oct 2014 22:57:49 EST ID:vL38NDWg No.196070 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>192987
So in saying that are we saying, that we are all part of god?
>>
Picture Unrelated - Sat, 04 Oct 2014 07:10:07 EST ID:ic4P9EnG No.196073 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1412421007951.jpg -(124291 B, 640x960) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 124291
>>196070
It is just discussion about a symbol, conceived by people. 'God' is a symbol and anyone is free to give that symbol any meaning he or she wants. I belive it is pointless to find one true definition of god, or definition closest to the truth. Look at all the misery this simple riffle-raffle caused throught human history over defining this mere abstract symbol.

TL;DR - whatever, mate. Name things as you fancy, just don't force your meaning onto other people.

PS. I love Alan Watts!

Much love!


Feminism and equality by George Shakeforth - Mon, 29 Sep 2014 08:54:29 EST ID:YCRp0L7h No.195988 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
1411995269964.jpg -(704507 B, 1920x1200) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 704507
I am writing a feature article about the feminism.
Anybody got any opinions on the matter, if so, any good things to put in my article?
Do you think that feminism is dead?
Thx /pss/
Also general feminism thead
16 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Charlotte Dellymock - Thu, 02 Oct 2014 12:46:42 EST ID:YsoDro+T No.196048 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>196041
>much easier to control/handle/work-with than their male counterparts, and I like that.
I know somebody that got turned down for a position within his office for just this reason. He asked the dude why he didn't even get interviewed and he straight up said "You wouldn't do as I say, you'd ask questions and take inititive and I don't need that in an assistant".

Btw it's kinda fucked you think women who can function independently are "trash". You realise that "easy to control" is a character flaw, right?

>>196046
"Businesses everywhere" huh? If that's true you must have a plethora of sources..
>>
Martin Crollerwater - Thu, 02 Oct 2014 16:03:55 EST ID:1heTqcJX No.196051 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>196048

>"Businesses everywhere" huh? If that's true you must have a plethora of sources..

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/08/07/perceptions-about-women-leaders-improve-but-gap-remains/
>>
Jarvis Wickleworth - Thu, 02 Oct 2014 19:07:16 EST ID:q+dVyNYa No.196054 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1412291236719.jpg -(98705 B, 1000x667) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 98705
>>195993

>I mean according to statistics I just pulled out of my ass, men get raped and abused just as much as women!

According to CDC statistics so not out of the ass, as you say. This is why people don't take feminism seriously.

As a gay man, I wouldn't just tell an anti-homosexual trying compare homosexuals with pedophiles that he's a disgusting man and have a kneejerk reaction. I would try to explain to him why his reasoning is incorrect to the point where he is alienated with facts and cannot be taken seriously.
>>
Charlotte Dellymock - Thu, 02 Oct 2014 19:43:58 EST ID:YsoDro+T No.196056 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>196051
>Martin makes a claim about subordinates
>you post a link about leadership
Bwaa
>>
Doris Buddlelock - Fri, 03 Oct 2014 00:40:35 EST ID:1heTqcJX No.196059 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>196056

no that link also talks about how across the board females and males prefer male *coworkers* too, not just bosses


Rape as a By-product of Egotism - The Masculine and Feminine Archetypes by Sidney Fanwater - Sun, 28 Sep 2014 20:31:35 EST ID:K7SEPeEs No.195983 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
1411950695915.jpg -(98278 B, 944x712) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 98278
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/24/rape-sexual-assault-ban-frats?CMP=twt_gu

*trigger warning for rape*
Frat houses are microcosmic boot camps for entrenching the Masculine Archetype; they operate much the same way that gangs do.
•Hazing as initiation and diminishing individuality- as defined as a being which identifies as independent of the group
•A sense of belonging and camaraderie amongst those in the group despite that group's initial cruelty- a feeling arises as though one has earned their place and are now above others outside the group
•Masculinity and fraternity reinforce aggression, dominance, control- all typically egotistical traits.
•As the feeling of fraternity increases, the circle of empathy shrinks- eventually to only include those within the group. (Important to note a strong sense of camaraderie amongst gang rapists as observed most notably in my mind during the Rwanadan Genocide but present in countless other scenarios)
•These super-charged Masculinites then go out into the college environment and naturally attract Feminites (the Feminine Archetype, every bit as insidious and manipulative as the Masculine)
-other examples of this outside of the collegiate realm lead me to believe that the Masculine and Feminine Archetypes reinforce one another.
•Sexuality being what it is in this country- that is, a cocktail of repressed feelings and acknowledgements with a sprinkle of steroidal infusion from societal reinforcement (identity validation through sexual conquest, marketing appeals to hyper sexuality, general pigeonholing of sex as an act that is owed, etc.) -it makes sense that when fused with this type of culture (Masculine/Feminine dichotomy) that the result is a 300% increase in rape
•This leads me to conclude that when the scale is pulled back to individuals who are not so easily typecast within societal boxes, yet still must exist with the institutions of society (individuality inevitably is betrayed by the institutions it operates within), the same basic principle is at work: Rape is absolutely a problem of identity; not solely gender identity, as gender roles are quite fluid (much like identity) but identity at large.
Right now, gender roles play such a large part in shaping identity that it may be easy to become confused as to where the problem originates but I believe that these problems arise from the egotistical hyperbole of the Masculine and Feminine Archetypes.
Rape is about power. Anger is about control. Dominance is the primary function of egotistical action.
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
9 posts and 1 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Matilda Blundlebanks - Tue, 30 Sep 2014 11:07:30 EST ID:H0iuvgD/ No.196019 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Confound variables:

Not random sample of people
*age
*intelligence
*interests
*personality
*etc
Girls could be lying more
They're all in college
Maybe they're raped by other peoplet
etc etc

And in the study which is referred to they use an attitude test to deduct the amount of actual rape occurrences from, which is retarded.
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>
Samuel Gunningbanks - Thu, 02 Oct 2014 10:11:07 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.196042 Ignore Report Quick Reply
OP, all of that is stupid as fuck.
Rape is natural. It's in almost every mammalian society of higher brain function. I assume rape is so common because our main biological purpose is reproduction. If our main biological purpose is reproduction, you can't deny that the opportunity to force another into letting you reproduce isn't enticing at times.

Sociologists over-think rape. Why? Because it's a hot topic for past and present social justice fags that can't accept that the world isn't all rainbows and fairness and that, believe it or not, not every case of reproduction is consensual, nor must it be when the main agenda is reproduction. You people think humans are some sort of godly figure, but I can assure you, a man is just an ape with a vocabulary.

Dolphins rape the shit out of each other all the time and you don't see feminazis making a big deal about that.
>>
Frederick Blatherman - Thu, 02 Oct 2014 10:56:11 EST ID:FqJYi18c No.196043 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>196042
>believe it or not, not every case of reproduction is consensual, nor must it be when the main agenda is reproduction.
>implying that sex in 2014 is only used for reproduction
>>
Frederick Blatherman - Thu, 02 Oct 2014 10:58:33 EST ID:FqJYi18c No.196044 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>196042
>You people think humans are some sort of godly figure, but I can assure you, a man is just an ape with a vocabulary.

An ape with a vocabulary that could be more than that if it chose to be. To choose to subvert our own nature is a great exercise in will. We can construct a better world, so why shouldn't we? Why should we fall prey to the naturalistic fallacy?

Just because something is "natural" does not mean we need to hold it up as desirable.
>>
Charlotte Dellymock - Thu, 02 Oct 2014 12:28:54 EST ID:YsoDro+T No.196047 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>196042
>I assume rape is so common because our main biological purpose is reproduction

"Biological purpose" isn't a thing. You meant to say that we have traits which were naturally selected for that make reproduction a high priority.

However, a tiny minority of rapes actually result in reproduction, and rapists do not cite reproduction as a motivation. You conjecture is interesting but utterly baseless.

>you can't deny that the opportunity to force another into letting you reproduce isn't enticing at times
I can, and so can 99% of the population. We honestly do not have those feelings.

Those of us with the desire to reproduce also have maternal/paternal instincts, which is why pair bonding exists. The act of rape goes against this natural bond parents share.

So while raping may be natural, NOT raping is significantly more natural.


Problematic/dysfunctional people - can they change by themselves? by Hannah Wiggleson - Sun, 13 Jul 2014 19:49:48 EST ID:pqk06mn6 No.195109 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
1405295388605.jpg -(79285 B, 428x750) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 79285
can we expect people to change their (self) destructive patterns that are deeply ingrained in their behavior/personality/outlook. should they be treated like children and forced to change, since they may have no motive or ability to conceive being able to change even?
21 posts and 1 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Angus Nashwill - Wed, 17 Sep 2014 18:17:36 EST ID:OUwZoYoE No.195875 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>195874
What if outwardly everything appears as it should be, while inside, you know you don't perform the function you should perform - and what's more, you don't even what that function would be?
This state can be called dysfunctional in the sense that not everything is how it should be - but how does one find out how it should be?
>>
Augustus Wonderway - Wed, 17 Sep 2014 21:39:47 EST ID:UWYDaXVE No.195876 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Sometimes the first one, sometimes the second one.

Sometimes even children have the capacity to change themselves for the better. Sometimes adults don't.

It's not a black and white thing.

As with almost everything in life, sometimes it's one way, sometimes it's the other way. This is not a middle ground fallacy, by the way; take an hour to look at how many cases are like this and you'll see that often, not always but OFTEN, things can go either way.
>>
Lydia Bledgenot - Thu, 18 Sep 2014 13:02:08 EST ID:F5RtLyIS No.195881 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>195875
that's fair, i would say that happens.

But also that another thing similar happens where sometimes your searching for what functionality would be and if it exists, leading you to feel it's abscence. If things are as they ought to be then why are they thus.
>>
Hannah Gonderbat - Fri, 19 Sep 2014 09:13:42 EST ID:CDP5PjGT No.195890 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>195871
>I make a good case study due to being a walking lump of opposites and extremes.

Every person is a lump of opposites and extremes.

People should realize this.
>>
Barnaby Baddlemine - Mon, 29 Sep 2014 20:09:04 EST ID:9jwuI1ab No.196009 Ignore Report Quick Reply
yes. I am dysfunctional and have problematic behaviours and I think Id benefit from an outside force guiding me to a better life. Although I can easily conceive being able to change I just dont know how


The one question to end all questions by Fanny Turveyford - Thu, 18 Sep 2014 17:54:21 EST ID:3kTcL0Pw No.195882 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
1411077261111.jpg -(33862 B, 223x310) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 33862
This is the one question that I think is the most important to answer, above all others:

If we are to assume that life is absurd, that there is no afterlife or soul, and no objective morality:

How does one live one's life?

I like to drink/smoke weed and consider this one question, but even after numerous attempts and having an introspective personality, I still have not reached an answer I like beyond "to live as comfortable, secure, and happy of a life as possible".

But life is uncertain, and the definition of happiness varies from person to person. I've found it is a deeply complex subject.

So, as drunk as I am now, I put the question to /pss/. Answer the question to the best of your ability, because it's a true question as far as modern science is concerned. What do you do if you assume said situation, and don't take a leap of faith into hope or religion? I want to know the Truth (capital T) above all else, yet I know I likely never will, not completely, within this lifetime. We still have a good amount of experimental data to work with, though, which is what I base the question on. Camus is also a good source, and I have considered his work a lot, but I have still not reached a final conclusion I'm satisfied with.

I'm curious how you guys will respond, if at all, if you even can. Pic unrelated and related at the same time.
11 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Rebecca Clacklefitch - Wed, 24 Sep 2014 13:18:56 EST ID:FnLSIj6V No.195933 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>195918
in a pretty cool way.
maybe if you ask "why the moon got there", i will care. but then you're asking why and i don't have to
>>
Faggy Pockson - Wed, 24 Sep 2014 14:21:48 EST ID:D8tJ5vV5 No.195934 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>195931
Ugh i don't feel like it, but here's some points anyways. The world is over-populated, fetuses are entirely unintelligible beings with significantly undeveloped senses, if you can kill animals for hunting you should be able to put down a stupid fetus, fetuses aren't sentient enough to have their own rights as they're overly dependent on the functioning off the physiology of another human being not even making consideration of the golden rule worthy here, stupid unwanted fetuses can provide potentially massive health benefits for fully conscious human beings, fuck fetuses, fuck fetuses, fetuses are fucking stupid and it's a waste of energy to let them grow if having a child is deemed undesirable, too many people will just go to back alley doctors or find alternative means of inducing abortion if no legal abortion clinics are available, fetuses might be tasty and worth eating, fetuses don't share the same emotional fear of death a developed human being does, fuck fetuses, fuck fetuses, if you don't go through abortion and set the child you're having up for adoption then you're just creating another miserable life in an orphanage, fuck fetuses, fuck fetuses etc
>>
Hugh Drasslestot - Wed, 24 Sep 2014 16:25:49 EST ID:4FzMI92o No.195936 Ignore Report Quick Reply
What I've discovered is that there is a notion out there so powerful that in effect you could treat it as a cheat code or a systems override, i don't think it's the answer to how you should live, but it's definitely a catalyst, the strongest there is.

I'm talking of suicide here and the (ironically) rejuvenating effect it can have on the body and mind to contemplate it and consider it. I think that in nature we have many possible triggers, you can call them "desperation landmines" that might make us want to kill ourselves. Losing a loved one, getting an infection, poisoning, losing a limb, maybe even being too introspective and hitting an existential crisis.

The main reasons we sidestep thinking about suicide is fear of course, but also guilt, we don't want to make people who love us feel bad about us dying, disrupting their lives or scarring them and if you're inculcated from birth with abrahamic values you feel guilty about suicide because of it being a sin and a path straight to hell.

You can observe very different behaviours from people who don't give as much of a shit about suicide and more broadly i suppose the value of life, psychopaths being our number one example of what it means to live life without fear and guilt, and so basically living life as though you are free to die any moment, no regrets.

Try it as a thought experiment for a week. Convince yourself you have a terminal illness and are not estimated to live beyond the end of this month. It's not desperation and apathy that will be your main staples during this time, quite the opposite.
>>
Shitting Driblingforth - Sat, 27 Sep 2014 08:16:55 EST ID:nUYOt2Yq No.195963 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>195934
>fuck fetuses
no you fuck a fetus, fuck face.
>>
Angus Goodlock - Sun, 28 Sep 2014 14:40:11 EST ID:3h0ggL7U No.195980 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1411929611511.png -(406408 B, 500x617) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 406408
> This is a repost of a repost



How can we live in today's world?
No one can ever REALLY tell us anything. They can only guide us.

There are a lot of people who need your help. They are HURTING, in ways we can't even conceive of. We are being SILENTLY OPPRESSED, and humanity is lying down CHEERFULLY to it's own death.

We're all expecting the revolution. WHERE IS IT?

the way to fight oppression is through expression.
the way to fight consumerism is through creativity.
the way to fight hate is through love.
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.


i don't think this is would be a good idea. by Oliver Sommlehood - Sun, 28 Sep 2014 00:19:21 EST ID:Lhp1yiVw No.195974 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
1411877961308.png -(125871 B, 400x400) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 125871
Hi /ph/
Lately, I've been feeling that all my thoughts, knowledge, senses, and methods of learning/verifying things are unreliable and unsure. I see a glass on my table, and i'm not sure what it is: it may be a mixture of certain matters, aligned in some specific way; it may be just something i imagine; it may be a disguised ninja; it may be a tiny patch of nothing that is not bound by any rules and so cosplays a glass for this evening.
I am not sure. I'd ask someone, but they might lie or have misconceptions themselves. I'd check some book or website, but those were created by people and may be the confident people writing down the same uncertain shit that I have in my head. I'd start to experiment with it, or try to produce another, but maybe it is only behaving like this for a year, or a century. Maybe I'd produce something totally different, with the same look and touch. What if it changes its mind when I'm already dead? I'd have said and written lots of things very confidently that were not true. I really don't want to trust what I experience a few times, or only at a few places, or a few ways, etc.
Rational thinking and *ductions don't really appeal either, since it's just building huge castles from sand. I may have missed out on it, but I never saw anyone lay down axioms without appealing to a language, signals or other things that they never defined and explain beforehand. All sorts of scientific areas refer to others, mostly going towards physics (and you can hear every day how this and that theory failed and that they really don't have any idea), or towards some lame statistical empiric bullshit produced in the last few decades. Maybe if these theories and explanations keep failing after time to time, the method itself is also unreliable.
All in all, I seem to find it increasingly harder to make preferences. Good and bad, right and left, right and wrong, etc. seems like attempts to exclude one or another for the sake of simplicity, even if that means getting an incomplete and unreliable picture in the end. I think there are no ends, or not even sides on such polar scales. Even when considering more complicated preferences, like a favorite food (which…
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>
Cornelius Smalllock - Sun, 28 Sep 2014 06:16:01 EST ID:Y22hXI3Q No.195976 Ignore Report Quick Reply
if your dealing with certainty perhaps the problem is with certainty itself and not the knowledge.

Perhaps you've developed a level of doubt that has bored into existential territories beyond rational sasiation. Your certainty itself needs to be adressed or explored. and what certainty is.
>>
Oliver Sommlehood - Sun, 28 Sep 2014 08:07:59 EST ID:Lhp1yiVw No.195978 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I kind of assumed that knowledge is certain. If it wouldn't be, I'd just call it idea, concept, theory, guess, belief... name it. A person's subjective certainty (like) doesn't have to do much with that, because then I could just be certain that I had another pie in the fridge, and voilá.
Also, I think the main point of the post wasn't certainty, but this thing that fails names and labels. and how everyone tries to make a subset of it that explains the whole set.


DELETED EVERYTHING by Fucking Bendlechin - Wed, 24 Sep 2014 12:43:31 EST ID:vWcAbLEe No.195932 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
1411577011390.jpg -(494708 B, 849x565) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 494708
I went on a serious slash-and-burn campaign through my inbox and old email accounts that I had in high school. According to my trash, I deleted over 14,000 emails in my primary account alone.
Besides the plethora of spam and promotionals, there were plenty of embarrassing nuggets of personal information, as well as tender messages from friends whom I haven't talked to in forever.

This exercise caused me to think about personal data in this "digital age". With storage issues being trivial, we can basically store every digital correspondence that we have ever sent or received. I wonder, does anyone care about their old data? Did I just delete a part of my "memories", albeit externally stored memories.

If you deleted all of your old backups/emails, would you be losing a part of your self?
>>
Martha Sattingshaw - Thu, 25 Sep 2014 11:17:37 EST ID:hTlZ7Uli No.195945 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>If you deleted all of your old backups/emails, would you be losing a part of your self?
If you went back and read them would you be overriding your current self in favour of your past self?

I used to care, but over time old memories serve less of a purpose. At most they might be useful someday so I let them stay on the hard disc.
>>
Samuel Worthingstone - Thu, 25 Sep 2014 13:32:41 EST ID:ZGi1tDkn No.195946 Ignore Report Quick Reply
You still have memories of them they exist.
If deleted, and someone questions the credibility of the email existence, you cant really prove it, thats about it.
That must be a weird experience OP, I still have a email from a teenager that has 10k emails
>>
Doris Nicklecocke - Sat, 27 Sep 2014 23:25:40 EST ID:z/+SKLWa No.195973 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I think about that when I delete pictures from my phone. If I go to a cool show and get some pics but later on delete them accidentally or for whatever reason they end up not being on my phone anymore. How can I prove to people that I was at the event that took place? I can't all I can really offer anymore is my word after that. I don't htink it really matters because having high quality cameras on a phone is a pretty new thing so before it was just like people maybe talked about the event more in person. People talked more in general and had better social skills too.


love by Luke de LaFranco - Mon, 22 Sep 2014 23:59:00 EST ID:4JzsVuBN No.195913 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
1411444740049.gif -(19742 B, 279x254) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 19742
I ain't even shittin you guise.

What is "love"??

and don't tell me it's oxytocin & all that brain chemicals, i feel it way deep and it's like I know what it is, but then when you ask me I'm all like, "it's all like, fuck what is it"
7 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Matilda Serrystot - Tue, 23 Sep 2014 19:51:14 EST ID:GocPVPTk No.195925 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>this thread again
Fucking fuck no please not again
>>
Faggy Pockson - Wed, 24 Sep 2014 01:57:24 EST ID:D8tJ5vV5 No.195929 Ignore Report Quick Reply
A lot of philosophers I've heard say there are different kinds of love, but I would describe loves such as sexual love and that of a mother's love as a passionately uncontrollable intuitive feeling you identify as "love" that comes to one without a driving need to question that sensation's existence.

>>195922
>>195914
Fuckin' false egos man.
>>
Esther Fazzlefoot - Wed, 24 Sep 2014 17:21:30 EST ID:Ak0VEBMk No.195937 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>195913
it's what you feel when you care for someone's happiness more than your own.
cliché but that's life
>>
Caroline Chossleville - Wed, 24 Sep 2014 22:22:22 EST ID:PMR6/8EW No.195941 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>195937
I agree with this, and also when you only desire good things to come into a person's life, and only wish for them whatever is best for them.
>>
Jarvis Crottingchun - Thu, 25 Sep 2014 09:49:03 EST ID:hgfltBKL No.195942 Ignore Report Quick Reply
love is desiring to act in the interest of the wellbeing of the other without condition, and it is also doing the act

i think it's unfortunate people popularly refer to limerence as love, but then again, it's kind of a nice surprise to discover what real love is

nb


<<Last Pages Next>>
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Report Post
Reason
Note
Please be descriptive with report notes,
this helps staff resolve issues quicker.