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


penis pump

Music by Michael Angelo - Tue, 15 Sep 2015 20:57:04 EST ID:I2RzmsmI No.202929 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1442365024413.jpg -(572999B / 559.57KB, 1995x1330) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 572999
My question is on the subject of music. Why does music have such a great effect on us? Why do a selection of chords, instruments and melodys effect our emotions and moods so strongly? Also please post a piece of music that moves you personally.
12 posts and 1 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
TX Dog - Mon, 21 Sep 2015 14:45:08 EST ID:t8lq0BoQ No.203126 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I nature animals dance pretty much for mating purposes. to attract a mate.
I think we are the only ones who dance for a multitude of purposes,(joy, interpretive,)but yall know, most humans still dance for that "primordial" reason. (mating)
Ian Pimbledale - Mon, 21 Sep 2015 23:12:42 EST ID:FMla+EEw No.203148 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Because beauty is real. Beauty follows nature. Golden section, sacred geometry and all that jazz. 'Beauty is in the eye of the beholder' is for ugly cunts.
David Cramblechit - Mon, 21 Sep 2015 23:14:27 EST ID:czeGFPE9 No.203149 Ignore Report Quick Reply
David Cramblechit - Mon, 21 Sep 2015 23:52:36 EST ID:czeGFPE9 No.203152 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Edwin Drengerdire - Tue, 15 Dec 2015 02:07:22 EST ID:4eCma76+ No.204485 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I've been very interested for quite some time as to what music is?
I have varied musical tastes and play instruments, I know definitions of it.

But what are notes? The change from A432 to A440 is very minimal, 8hz.
How do we recognize A or D#? Some people are almost born with perfect pitch.
This suggests that it is an inherent quality of either reality, life or humanity.


Does a pleasant body mean a pleasant person? by Angus Funnertudging - Tue, 28 Jul 2015 06:01:59 EST ID:hEycBgd8 No.201905 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1438077719565.jpg -(47843B / 46.72KB, 430x566) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 47843
qualities of body and qualities of the person/self/i of that body. how they appear/how they be and who and what they truly are.
7 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
Eugene Punnerluck - Sun, 02 Aug 2015 13:26:32 EST ID:OacPc8lB No.202061 Ignore Report Quick Reply

I learned that it's way easier to be friendly and courteous, when I know with complete confidence that I could brutally murder the person I am speaking to, before they could properly react... Almost killed a mooch with my foot on instinct the other day cause I was a bit too high and his neck, well... It was there... But that not point.
Wesley Honningstone - Mon, 03 Aug 2015 12:25:37 EST ID:Kf/DS3qV No.202068 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Not really. While I do not want to generalize too much I can honestly say that a higher percentage of people I know who have "pleasant bodies" (thin and/or in shape i assume you mean) tend to be more full of themselves. I do not believe most of them are consciously that way, society has a way of treating people differently because of appearance and it is can easy to not take much notice of how people can be treated on the negative end of that spectrum when you only experience the positive end.
Eliza Dottingtone - Fri, 07 Aug 2015 16:48:58 EST ID:2HXORMkV No.202186 Ignore Report Quick Reply
You're a nutty retarded edgy faggot and I could blow your brains out. So come at me, jolly african-american.
Ian Goffinghedging - Tue, 11 Aug 2015 01:16:52 EST ID:xQGo2Z4N No.202228 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1439270212787.jpg -(124462B / 121.54KB, 698x698) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
I am a pleasant person.
Edwin Drengerdire - Tue, 15 Dec 2015 01:58:22 EST ID:4eCma76+ No.204484 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I've found that a pleasant face correlates with a pleasant person.
Not necessarily asthetic beauty as portrayed in the media but you can tell so much about a person from their face and eyes.

Not too sure how to elaborate this, laugh/frown lines ect.
I've seen so many "beautiful women" who have absolute bitch faces, same with guys.
There is a definite relationship between the beauty of the body and the mind as long as we don't use societys/medias idea of beauty

Consequentialism by Sophie Buzzham - Thu, 19 Nov 2015 10:25:44 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.204206 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1447946744490.gif -(1369702B / 1.31MB, 432x768) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 1369702
I think consequentialism is a very important philosophy. It seems clear to me that the real world around us operates via consequentialism above other philosophies in regards to ethics. For instance, a drunk driver has some small percent chance of killing someone, but we only penalize the drunk drivers who actually end up in that small percentage where as the others, so long as they're not noticed, get no punishment even though they're willingly taking that chance of possibly killing someone.

What do you guys think of consequentialism? You'd better give it a read about, first, because there are like a dozen different consequentialisms discussed in this article.
Phineas Sebbleridge - Thu, 19 Nov 2015 10:42:12 EST ID:QAG7tSOg No.204207 Ignore Report Quick Reply

If you traumatize your kids when they're kids and then they go out and kill someone when they're adults, under consequentialism, would it not in fact be your fault that they grew up to be murderers?
Sophie Buzzham - Thu, 19 Nov 2015 11:24:40 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.204208 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Well, let's talk about that for a minute. Let's say there's 10 families, and every family is ripe with abuse. The families all have 1 kid, so 10 kids total. Eventually, they all move away, and 9 out of 10 of them become totally normal citizens where as 1 of them becomes a psychopath and goes around killing people. See, in that situation, the 9 families with the 9 kids all get off scoff-free (success: normality), where as the 1 family that ended up in that small percent (failed: psychopathy) would be scrutinized under law. So, even though 100% of the 10 families committed the crime, only 10% will be slammed for it. Even then, it might not be the whole family, dumbing the number down to maybe 5%.

See, in the 1 family that failed to produce a normal child, first of all the child will be killed or disposed of in some manner, possibly life in prison away from society. See, the child that grew up to be the psychopath is the psychopath, and the psychopath is the problem in society's eyes, not the parents, because one is out there murdering while the others are actually not committing any real crime. Punishing the parents for the crime of their child will not fix the problem; the child, itself, has to be disposed of to fix the problem.
Sophie Buzzham - Thu, 19 Nov 2015 11:29:35 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.204209 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Can we penalize the parents? Not without proof of a real crime, like records of them teaching the child to be a psychopath or something like that.

Because, you see, they're all innocent according to determinism, but regardless the problem has to be solved. You might ask, are the parents at fault for raising the child? But then you literally have to ask, are the parents' parents at fault for raising them? And are their parents' parents' parents at fault for how they raised their children? It regresses infinitely, this blame game.

That is why the blame falls mainly on the last link in the chain. The whole chain might be corrupt, but that's ok because it wasn't a problem. But then when the final link in the chain of events start behaving in a way utterly unacceptable by society, then that link is destroyed. That's the significance of consequentialism; it targets the straw that breaks the camel's back, not the entire bundle of straw atop the camel.

But that being said, the parents would be scrutinized by the law. And then if the parents are deemed dangerous, like they were deliberately training kids to be psychopaths or something, then they'd face repercussions, but if the child became a psychopath merely from bad parenting and an abusive environment, then sad to say you can't really penalize the parents or the environment but instead could only try to alter them to make them fit better.
Nigel Binderbetch - Thu, 19 Nov 2015 12:43:31 EST ID:Gud7bvca No.204210 Ignore Report Quick Reply

I think it's important to realize that "blame" and "fault" can have degrees to them. Most directly at fault is the killer, with their parents removed one degree from that, and the grandparents (if they were abusive to the parents) are removed another degree from that.

Also, any friends (or online strangers) that may have encouraged the act are 1 degree removed.

Those people who encouraged it usually don't feel responsible because a lot of people think of blame as a kind of binary guilty/not guilty switch.
Ian Shakefuck - Mon, 23 Nov 2015 01:43:17 EST ID:Aq3q4fOl No.204262 Ignore Report Quick Reply

If you want to treat this with degrees like in hermetics as you are, then we should apply the principle of polarity.

The Cure for Aniety by Caroline Hoggleson - Sun, 01 Nov 2015 02:50:45 EST ID:d2xa0k9p No.203890 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1446364245821.jpg -(56409B / 55.09KB, 717x473) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 56409
I know this is not the board to ask this question, but I need some help that I know philosophy can provide.

For seven years (almost eight) my mind has been in a state of constant anxiety. IT might have actually been way longer, since I've been anxious as long as I can remember. There must have been some philosopher that knew how to solve this questions.

Millenia of wisdom must have the answer.

I hae no sense of purpose, my mind rushes too much to be able to sincerely adhere to some higher cause, aka religion.

Medication doesn't do shit either, but I just want to know who can guide me into a better life, since philosophy also deals in a huge way with that.
25 posts and 2 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
William Dricklesatch - Mon, 16 Nov 2015 19:59:53 EST ID:jftPiJo0 No.204133 Ignore Report Quick Reply
i have both. tell me why this is relevant
Albert Dronnerstock - Mon, 16 Nov 2015 23:02:30 EST ID:qIRqWCS/ No.204141 Ignore Report Quick Reply

Therapy is a good place to start. And if your therapist doesn't help find a new one.

I scoffed at that advice a year ago when talking about the damage my childhood had done to me. Now I'm in therapy and feeling better everyday.

The problem is as if your mind was a bookshelf with all the unlabeled books strewn on the floor. To find anything you need you have to sift through them on the ground, sometimes finding things you didn't want to. By sitting down an hour a week and talking about these you can pick them up, label them, and put them in their proper place. And it get's easier every time.

Also, if they tell you about breathing exercises actually use them. I didn't for the first two weeks, but as soon as I actually tried it I was sold on how effective it is.

Finally, I really hope you feel better soon. Have a long and happy life, OP.
Cyril Fumblebirk - Wed, 18 Nov 2015 17:22:26 EST ID:JPf0L266 No.204189 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Is it alright to get a new therapist at the same place your old one's at? I saw someone for 3 or 4 years and quit a year ago, but in addition to discouragement, I wasn't sure if it would be ... I don't know. and intentionally looking elsewhere is a problem because it's difficult enough getting there, even worse if it's really far away.
Caroline Dingerfield - Thu, 19 Nov 2015 14:10:23 EST ID:BH4IzZ4L No.204213 Ignore Report Quick Reply


It's your right as a patient to see whoever you want for treatment and it is illegal for anyone to harass you about it or otherwise sabotage your treatment or right to a second opinion.
Fucking Bodgesatch - Thu, 19 Nov 2015 22:54:57 EST ID:9FWlDb7z No.204222 Ignore Report Quick Reply
STEP ONE don't listen to any of these fools. I didn't read their posts but they're not mine so they must be wrong
STEP TWO read the Sylvia method and Rajnish Roy's rewiring the brain.

Also I would recommend complete behavioral overhauls. I realized when I was young, and I think a good chunk of the population, that I often get into certain moods and there's no way to improve everything when I'm trusting myself. For example just not wanting to go outside. But if I were forced to go outside I'd have to admit that I was having fun and my previous feeling was wrong.

Don't always trust how you feel, and try out some things that have worked for millennia. Do some yard work. Get up early enough to see some human faces in morning light. Eat actual pieces of food like fruit and vegetables. Or perhaps lock yourself in your place for a few months to years and get away from socialization for a bit to get in touch with your genuine self.

Basically stop listening to yourself and do what would actually be good for you. Don't pigeonhole yourself. If you can't stand talking to someone, push them down and run away. Or even just imagine telling them you can't stand them, and imagine their reaction, and refer to this false memory the next time you see them as it changes how you feel about them. Or the classic imagine them naked

Substitute methylenedioxy compound and Acceptance and Commitment Therapy... by Polly Gemblebet - Thu, 29 Oct 2015 06:33:03 EST ID:LlssjEU/ No.203824 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1446114783482.jpg -(51380B / 50.18KB, 479x720) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 51380
Versus MAPS MDMA and CBT for trauma patients.

The short of it is:

Current MAPS research for PTSD patients is low dose MDMA and CBT. My issue here is that due many of these patients are on SSRIs, because of this the dosage of MDMA has to stay low due to serotonin concentrating to lethal levels (serotonin syndrome/toxicity). If the treating psychologist substituted the MDMA for a lower antagonizing SSRA, say, MDAI or MDA, could the higher doses of dopamine help with the therapy wile having lower releases of norepinephrine and serotonin?

Also your opinion on CBT vs behavioral modification type therapies.
Molly Drunningfick - Thu, 29 Oct 2015 13:40:30 EST ID:1hpypBHI No.203829 Ignore Report Quick Reply
William Bibblepetch - Thu, 29 Oct 2015 23:32:26 EST ID:LlssjEU/ No.203838 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Is this not the board for social sciences? There's more to SS then Philosophy and gender studies.

Social Media Usage by Nigger Cummerchedging - Tue, 06 Oct 2015 16:34:33 EST ID:K4gjTsvD No.203433 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1444163673451.png -(51864B / 50.65KB, 977x518) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 51864
Can someone explain the data from this Pew survey to me? Why would social media usage among adults decline in the last half of 2012? If you look at the data for teens and all age groups, usage goes up, but not for adults in any age group other than 30-49. Did it have something to do with that end of the world bullshit? Statistical anomaly that means nothing? What do you think?

link to survey

1 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
James Buzzfield - Tue, 06 Oct 2015 16:57:31 EST ID:+EaQCu0K No.203437 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Well OP, it's no surprise that the number of people getting online is going up and up.

But not everybody who goes online gets social media.
So what this means is that in 2012 a lot of people got online, and most of them didn't get social media. It could mean some poor country finally got cheap internet access, or ISP's charged less in some other country, or computer ownership increased.
Nigger Cummerchedging - Tue, 06 Oct 2015 17:01:31 EST ID:K4gjTsvD No.203438 Ignore Report Quick Reply
If you look at internet usage over the same time period, it also goes down, specifically from November to December.

James Buzzfield - Tue, 06 Oct 2015 17:06:45 EST ID:+EaQCu0K No.203439 Ignore Report Quick Reply
That refers to Americans only though. I don't think the first one does, or at least it didn't specify.
Priscilla Burrydale - Fri, 23 Oct 2015 17:06:32 EST ID:lTgx8tGE No.203788 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Mere conjecture:
What if the wave of liberalism that is being felt (LGBT successes, the rise of Sanders as a viable candidate, #Blacklivesmatter) is off-putting older conservatives and causing them to leave?
Doris Clorringstadge - Sat, 24 Oct 2015 21:04:21 EST ID:RWORJU8H No.203797 Ignore Report Quick Reply
There's also forced family gatherings, vacation time, less work (some people work online, on social media)

I'm wrong, but when will I be right? by ShittingSubject RaffleDickface - Thu, 22 Oct 2015 16:58:11 EST ID:3D6DHkQ3 No.203754 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1445547491005.jpg -(150087B / 146.57KB, 642x960) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 150087
Absolue desolation; we find ourself ensnared in the gradual loss of

comfort that we call despair. There is a certain alien level of chaos

entertwined with this state of mind. In finding our self we also lose

ourselves; we are now trapped in a maeosoleum of destruction.

I would furthermore like to elaborate on this terrible sickness that

our generation is experiencing firstand, I would like to bring this to

the foreground. The general apathy that our children and our current

generation tends to embody. This is due to a lack of trust; a failed
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
ShittingSubject RaffleDickface - Thu, 22 Oct 2015 17:06:07 EST ID:usb4ZvPl No.203756 Ignore Report Quick Reply

An old man speaks to you. He talks of mathematical equations and electrical

properties that pertain to your mental and or societal issues. This man is nothing but a

test, you must pass him to become your full potential. Yes, you must become this.

This might come as a surprise to some, but there is nothing more to knowledge

than a chemically induced chaos, an overwhelming urge for what is correct and what

excels the human substructure.

We are sentient beings who crave nothing more than a simple hedonistic lifestyle.
Phineas Goodwater - Thu, 22 Oct 2015 17:26:06 EST ID:4FMHFVY2 No.203757 Ignore Report Quick Reply
ShittingSubject RaffleDickface - Thu, 22 Oct 2015 17:29:54 EST ID:3D6DHkQ3 No.203758 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1445549394698.jpg -(33849B / 33.06KB, 600x190) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

Martha Foddlewell - Thu, 22 Oct 2015 21:18:35 EST ID:muQrysO+ No.203770 Ignore Report Quick Reply
For me you were right until you tied it into society and social issues.

People have a lack of belief when something that should not be continually is. An example of that is political apathy but it's just one reaction to something not working out that had promise.

In jungian terms the puar is the eternal child archetype. It's where we find creativity, it's the cognitive function that sees potential, and promise but also routine signs of dissapointment and unreliability. Therefore what is promising is often not dependable. And we can't find an answer to why this would happen in the grand scheme of things seen optimistically so eventually we see that scheme as corrupted by something or as always having been corrupt and us becoming wise to it.

Still we can be depressed because essentially out inner child or where all our hope comes from and enthusiasm can't be happy with a world where it seems like whatever you are positive about is doomed by virtue of it being positive or idealistic. That what we see potential in, and where we see it, will never become actual. Or if it starts to it will always end without having reached it's heights.

You can think of every youth movement the sixties, punk Rock in the seventies, rock n roll in the fifties. As an example of the puar a new way of life found that leaves people jaded by how it all ended. In some way turning them bitter to the possibility of believing in things like that which is there own dissapointment from experience.

The fear that perspective that develops organically will never take it's place and that the changing of the guard never occurs and the what was had to contribute gets blocked out in some way by likely hood itself.

Keep struggling and hold on.
Jack Pickbanks - Fri, 23 Oct 2015 05:25:22 EST ID:Q2wCcWf6 No.203778 Ignore Report Quick Reply

your pictur reminds me of the nausicaa of the valley of the wind manga i read

A problem of a idiot but still a philosophic problem? by Edward Granddale - Fri, 16 Oct 2015 11:24:02 EST ID:ayxphSq/ No.203585 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1445009042150.jpg -(75754B / 73.98KB, 508x720) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 75754
Group doing vs individual doing

Are there not groups that say they are for one thing yet do something else, sometimes something bad? I think there are but lets not name any one of them since this is more about the method of it all, the method of how to fairly judge groups.

Lets say some people have a really bad experience with a certain group, but when they complain about the group, the group excuses it self by saying that it was not the group that did it but bigots under their banner.

Sometimes that excuse is valid and sometimes not (i think). The question is, when or when not should you accept the excuse?
16 posts and 1 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Jack Pickfuck - Tue, 20 Oct 2015 12:14:24 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.203656 Ignore Report Quick Reply
To answer your question, OP, I would say that for one, every group says one thing and does another, only because there are usually so many people in a group that all of them have their own unique agenda, and this creates sub-sections of groups. Just as an example, you have feminists that believe in classical liberal equality and feminists that believe in socialist equality. You can't have both, and feminism preaches both, and feminists as a whole just kind of pick and choose which one they prefer, creating both truth and falseness to both claims.

As for whether or not something is a bigots fault or a groups fault, I will say it's usually a gray area where both are true. Like for instance, feminism is somewhat misandristic, like some of their ideas are based in misandry. So, a feminist who accepts these theories based in misandry is causing more misandry, but that's mainly because their group ideology told them so. But like for instance Feminism really doesn't say 'kill all men' even though it does empower women to be free to say that, so when a feminist says 'kill all men' I assume that mainly she's just a bigot and that's mostly her fault, but I can't deny that she felt enabled by a group, making it partially their fault. See, in that instance, if feminism as a whole apologized for feminists saying 'kill all men' and denounced those actions, then 'kill all men' would become just bigotry and you couldn't blame it on Feminism. Again, this is just an example, I don't really have too many feelings about feminism but I've seen all these things so it was easy to reference them.

Excuses are never valid. As someone working in management, I'll tell you right now 9 times out of 10 an excuse is just bullshit, but 1 time out of 10 it will be legitimately related to things like illnesses or injury and etc and in those cases you can let it slide and even try to help the person, but regardless you can't accept their excuse and you must make sure the work gets done regardless of the excuse. Excuses have almost no weight in the real world. Success and failure are 99% what the world cares about, and as a manager I know this to be t…
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
Faggy Pibblebury - Tue, 20 Oct 2015 16:50:50 EST ID:qVIwcc4e No.203665 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Alan Moore and Grant Morrison are awesome magicians. And while they may just believe I magic in general they do also believe in the world being chaos.

Not all people suck and some highly intelligent people believe in at first glance silly things because they are looking for away to express a belief in whatever it is that creativity is.

Listen to Salvador Dali he had insane ideas that were amazing he believed them because he applied them and actually worked with them all the time.
Polly Fonkinbanks - Tue, 20 Oct 2015 22:22:54 EST ID:wZDypwLY No.203678 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Should someone change the pic so the kid is giving him a syringe?
A Wizard - Thu, 22 Oct 2015 16:58:29 EST ID:K2C3c/Hm No.203755 Ignore Report Quick Reply

What do you think of the jews?
CuntDICK PopeyesFingaBanga - Thu, 22 Oct 2015 17:42:36 EST ID:3D6DHkQ3 No.203762 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I sometimes tell people i'm not addicted to chicken and then when they bring in the chicken for like a graduation or some sorts or a reward for some mundane accomplishment I resume my genetically coded instruction to eat all the chicken like I'm a black man at miama bike week. Is this what u mean or nah?

Data-driven decision-making is the only rational philosophy by Beatrice Gannerfeck - Wed, 19 Aug 2015 11:25:49 EST ID:sIpriB3R No.202351 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1439997949999.jpg -(1009323B / 985.67KB, 1280x5859) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 1009323
Why the fuck do people think anything other than statistics and hard facts matter when it comes to determining how to properly organize society? No, your feelings do not matter. No, your bible does not matter. No, your abstract logic and even morals do not matter. Being gay used to be immoral. Doing drugs used to be immoral. Morals change over time but numbers don't. Data is the only objective truth. The only tricky part is determining the proper metrics to use, but regardless, we utilize those anyway.

We know that tough-on-crime policies don't work because places where they don't do that have much lower recidivism/arrest rates. We know that criminalizing/repressing sexuality doesn't work because places where they do that actually have more IPs per capita accessing porn sites. We know that basic income/welfare does work because all strong welfare states have less crime and higher employment rates.

So tell me /pss/, why do your words matter more than my numbers?
86 posts and 6 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Edwin Honnerleg - Thu, 10 Sep 2015 10:43:48 EST ID:/K5GM6am No.202794 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I'll just leave this here:

>Data obsession and the politics of facts
>Data obsession pitfall #1: Relying exclusively on data to decide what to do next
>Data obsession pitfall #2: Losing focus and wasting time on small data-driven improvements
>Data obsession pitfall #3: Not understanding the short-term predictive nature of most data
Barnaby Grandwill - Wed, 14 Oct 2015 07:34:59 EST ID:vcFCSwwO No.203552 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I am all for data, but is it just me or is there an open secret that is taboo to talk about that everyone realizes that our rationalist world view isn't quite the full picture but we just go along with it because
a) It generally works
b) As soon as you open up the discussion a myriad of nutbags jump in with their tired crap and behave generally unpleasantly
A Wizard - Fri, 16 Oct 2015 15:17:33 EST ID:K2C3c/Hm No.203590 Ignore Report Quick Reply

Because you call them "nutbags" when they supply alternatives to the very shit you're complaining about.

If you don't want a solution, then don't fucking ask for one.
Ebenezer Drummlelure - Tue, 20 Oct 2015 18:29:06 EST ID:kl+rP6sx No.203667 Ignore Report Quick Reply

>feelings don't matter

>even though the pursuit of good things is an irrational drive

I totally understand the problem of bias impeding utility, but tons of aspies seem to literally think ethics and oughts are some matter of brute formal logic, rather than of preference (in the most root sense).
William Debbledock - Wed, 21 Oct 2015 14:40:12 EST ID:j0uoDf21 No.203692 Ignore Report Quick Reply
You're totally right, it is taboo to say our world is not rationalist. Why? Because if people realized that were true, there'd be a revolution tomorrow. People want their leaders to make the objective best decisions and they want their laws to be reasonable. Everyone, regardless what they say in this thread, wants a rational society. We aren't quite there yet, but at least we have something to strive for.

>ethics and oughts are some matter of brute formal logic,
Hate to break to ya, but that's exactly how it is. Do you think we made stealing and rape illegal a long time ago because that's what it said in some magic book? No! Societies where rape and theft went unchecked had more disease and worse economies. Those societies collapsed. The societies with laws against that stuff survived to influence modern society. Like it or not, pedophilia is as innate a sexual desire as homosexuality. However, one causes a negative mental impact on children and one does not. Guess which one was recently made legal/socially acceptable? The measurable impact of the legislation is the only thing that's relevant. It's like Newton's Flaming Laser Sword for government.

Do you realize that in certain countries, it's not only legal, but commonplace to mutilate the genitals of infants? Do you realize that in certain countries cannabis is still illegal? Like you say, these laws/ethics are a matter of preference, but there is a recent strong push to get these changed. Why? These laws are likely to change in our lifetimes because they cause more problems than they solve. Crying shit "BUT IT MUH RELIGION" doesn't cut it anymore, and that irrational sort of argument is quickly becoming powerless the world over.

It really sucks you guys hate rational laws based on logic and facts, but that's the world we live in, and it shall only be moreso in the future. Laws are fortunately driven by numbers, for the most part. That's just not up for debate. Remember, people on the side of data-driven decision-making don't have to convince you in this thread or anywhere else. We already won. If you earnestly believe that "FACTS ARE DA DEVIL&quo…
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.

Drugs and society by Polly Popperwater - Thu, 17 Sep 2015 14:51:03 EST ID:Qcd7zFOx No.202969 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1442515863706.jpg -(126605B / 123.64KB, 1200x834) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 126605
I'm uncertain whether to put this here or on /pol/ but years ago I used to post here frequently so I'll go for the nostalgia value.

With the title, I'd hope to focus mostly on the present and practical. What do you see as currently going on in society regarding the drug war, attitudes towards and beliefs about recreational drugs, their users and producers? How would you see it improved?
Perhaps there is a bit of exhaustion on this issue? Everywhere on the internet you tend to see very polarized arguments from people with passionate opinions but at the same time "the drug problem" keeps being regarded as unimportant, even childish and not worth serious consideration.

I've thought about this for long, since teenage I've thought the world drug situation a great injustice, though as a teenager one is likely to think a great many thing injustices, but this was different. The more you looked into it, especially the recent history, the more it baffled as I couldn't see any profit in it for anyone. Recently watched the Netflix fast food version of the story of Pablo Escobar and it had a nice quote something like this "In the [drug] world the line between good and evil get's a little blurry...", blurry to the point of farce I would say. I've heard a wide variety of conspiracy theories as to what the vested interests are in maintaining the current paradigm in drug policy, but throughout the years none have convinced me. I remember once a big moment on a LSD trip being a "realization" that the drug war made sense as an essential part of producing this beautiful experience I was having and that's still the best rationalization/justification I've been able to produce... I honestly believe that with great likelihood whatever beliefs you profess you would regardless find benefit in prioritizing the improvement of the global drug problem.
Certainly, there is no easy solution. Yet I think it's worth giving some thought to the violent massacres in producer and transit countries and the suffering of junkies everywhere. Those are really serious issues that sweep the foundations of whole states, involving countless lives and billions of capital. The uproar in Latin America about this should really come as no surprise, but are we gonna pretend drugs are just their issue?

I'd assume many people on this site have consumed illegal drugs as I have and in this historical tragedy I'm most disappointed in *us* as we drift through it assuming no responsibility. Of course the people who have to identify themselves as drug users unable to hide it and unable to follow along with society pretending that nothing is going on are usually in awful positions for carrying responsibility over it and are often branded mentally ill, not without any reason either. Recently watched a documentary where someone said that "the traditional user of drugs has historically been primarily the military" which is a sort of funny statement, but true. Generally it seems that sad lives invite drugs, as suggested by the Rat Park experiment, rather than drugs inviting sad lives. Still, there are countless stories of users and abusers doing service to their communities and themselves, both of those that quit and those that didn't. I recommend watching this speech, especially the part where he tells the story of Bud Osborn( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bud_Osborn ):


But these stories get overshadowed by the hatefulness, the self-loathing, the conflicts. One of the most impressive reform organizations on the planet has certainly been LEAP (Law Enforcement Against Prohibition) and I remember someone from LEAP in a speech giving advice to the marijuana reform movement in it's earlier stages in the US highlighting that the movement should learn at least one thing from the police: discipline in maintaining mission focus. It is essential to avoid falling into divisive internal struggles and instead keep pushing forwards with one purpose. It's tempting to throw 'the other drug' user under the bus but it does not serve the greater collective benefit.

Personally I've for long been angered about how the government which one insists to at least pretend to serve the citizens interests fails to rationally deal with this huge market and fails to extract any capital through taxation, drive forward scientific knowledge through research or protect the consumers and workers. I find it very annoying that rarely anyone is willing to contemplate trying to capture the drug demand into a publicly regulated market as an anti-terror and anti-crime strategy to sap the financial fuel of non-state actors. It is usually only pulled out as a last resort option when the drug problem becomes too visible and not given serious thought until then, in a "oh shit, this game is getting way too hot, imma pull out!" fashion that is all part of the unique charm of this issue. Well, actually in my country recently the head of anti-drug police was put on trial for multiple counts of drug trafficking and corruption and whatnot, so I guess he was at least trying to have some kind of handle on the market?
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
15 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
David Ferrywell - Thu, 24 Sep 2015 08:39:01 EST ID:VYQEhjpx No.203216 Ignore Report Quick Reply
You might believe it in advance but if you believe it always works it can lead to the opposite in terms of conflict resolution.

I'm not saying in terms of parental discipline, across contexts you have to be tactical.

The result of violence is often acceptance of an ongoing conflict.
Simon Bunridge - Thu, 24 Sep 2015 10:12:04 EST ID:Qcd7zFOx No.203219 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Perhaps in the future the Drug War will just be ashamedly thought of as The Big Overreaction. It's really not supposed to be this big of an issue and it's artificially made this big.
A Wizard - Mon, 12 Oct 2015 08:48:18 EST ID:K2C3c/Hm No.203509 Ignore Report Quick Reply

It DOES always work. There's no fucking conflict when the other guy is motherfucking dead. How fucking stupid are people nowadays? I can't fucking stand it!
William Tillingdale - Mon, 12 Oct 2015 09:05:17 EST ID:aG9/2Wow No.203511 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Yes no way there would be any retaliation for that nobody knew that guy, and he wasn't part of larger group, or the "other guy" isn't a larger group.

yes that's exactly what happened with the hatfields and McCoys, and the bloods and the crips.

It's not how World War I started or anything with one dudes death. It's not how you end up arrested years later in some cold case file. It doesn't work. And it's not the start of a conflict. Violence is the beginning presumably if the other guys death is on the line of potential outcomes in whatever level of violence you are imagining now so is yours.

How is this effective or worth it at all.
William Tillingdale - Mon, 12 Oct 2015 09:13:10 EST ID:aG9/2Wow No.203512 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Also I'm alluding to situations where it really isn't the only option left but people's mind sets and arguments get put to use in shooting people they see because of thinking in a higher stakes situation then they were in. In reality they were the threat.

AI and qualia debate by Thomas Crusslenedge - Sat, 05 Sep 2015 12:03:47 EST ID:JQnDFS+M No.202696 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1441469027001.jpg -(125258B / 122.32KB, 900x844) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 125258
I'm not well versed in philosophy, I have only read wiki-sites and a few canonical works, so sorry in advance if I use terms wrong or something.

You know how some of us claims that how can we know strong AI isn't just dumb algorithm and logic systems faking they're conscious?

I've been thinking about this, leaning towards thinking an AI would just be like a very convincing doll, and suddenly it struck me: There's no difference between simulated qualia and 'real' human qualia. The experience is exactly the same.

How can I claim this? Well, human qualia IS simulated. This is indisputable fact, and here's why according to biological psychology;

The brain receives sensory stimuli from our extremities. Cold, pain, vision, hearing. All begins as varied neuronal signals, constantly feeding into our thinking lump of fat. Most of the brain is dedicated to analyzing this information. To make sense of it, pick out the parts that's relevant to the organism and its survival. It then, and here's the critical part, generates an integrated simulation based on the analyzed information for the consciousness to experience. This is why dreams often feel, look and smell so real, it's the brain simulating a reality without outside sensory information. The reality we experience is nothing but a simulated representation of the world.

Yet while this is true, we have the audacity to scream "Chinese Room" and refute strong AI. I claim that there's no functional OR qualitative difference between the Chinese Room and the brain. They're both computational substrate, one wetware, one analog. Both simulate experience and give rise to a person capable of responding like a person should and would.

Feel free to pick this claim apart. That's how we grow.
48 posts and 3 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Lydia Gillychun - Wed, 30 Sep 2015 12:45:45 EST ID:iWimWzNV No.203302 Ignore Report Quick Reply
The experience is the same, sure, but the methods used to reach it are different. It's like a computer being coded to learn how to paint perfectly and an artist practicing and perfecting their art after years of struggle. The artist's understanding and experience came about "naturally," for lack of a better word at the moment, whereas the computer just does it.

The artist has experienced failing and errors, and that's a kind of qualia that the computer does not experience. If you program an A.I. to do that, it's no different than a psychopath pretending to be sad or happy. Yeah the experience and expression may be or appear to be exactly the same, but it's artificial, fake, replication with none of the human foundation upon which the final result rests.
Phineas Fudgewedging - Thu, 01 Oct 2015 14:42:33 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.203349 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Prove it.
Lydia Shakeridge - Fri, 02 Oct 2015 19:40:10 EST ID:2MghtRCB No.203363 Ignore Report Quick Reply

The AI would be an extension of our selves, in the same way that child is made out of materials gathered from the earth, which is then broken down by our bodies and reconstructed inside of them womb into a human fetus, which is programmed to experience and interact with reality. I don't see how a human made machine is much different from a human made human, other than the method by which the body was constructed.
Barnaby Fuckingway - Sat, 03 Oct 2015 15:14:01 EST ID:V4/SgSD9 No.203376 Ignore Report Quick Reply
It's one more step.

And people have to question if that is the step that's to far. At least one party will feel obligated to voice the opposition if not just for the reason of that position being understood.
Eliza Niggergold - Mon, 05 Oct 2015 15:03:01 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.203404 Ignore Report Quick Reply
That's not a proof. That's a hypothesis, untested.

<<Last Pages
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Report Post
Please be descriptive with report notes,
this helps staff resolve issues quicker.