Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
Name
You can leave this blank to post anonymously, or you can create a Tripcode by using the format Name#Password
Subject
Comment
[i]Italic Text[/i]
[b]Bold Text[/b]
[spoiler]Spoiler Text[/spoiler]
>Highlight/Quote Text
[pre]Preformatted & Monospace Text[/pre]
[super]Superset Text[/super]
[sub]Subset Text[/sub]
1. Numbered lists become ordered lists
* Bulleted lists become unordered lists
File

Sandwich


frankfurt school

View Thread Reply
- Sun, 05 Mar 2017 19:09:16 EST ypqGZf3j No.207836
File: 1488758956835.jpg -(76895B / 75.09KB, 776x1200) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. frankfurt school
is it safe to say that no one who believes in "cultural marxism" and points to the frankfurt school as some spooky bohemian grove type of thing where a bunch of jews gathered to decide the fate of the world has actually read this thing?
90 posts and 11 images omitted. Click View Thread to read.

Game of Thrones

View Thread Reply
- Mon, 03 Apr 2017 10:02:01 EST 54PBc7Id No.207967
File: 1491228121844.jpg -(824344B / 805.02KB, 1400x700) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. Game of Thrones
Let's talk about a subject everyone can understand; Game of Thrones.
Who your favorite GoT characters are, in my opinion, says a lot about who you are as a person.

Of course, my favorite character by far is Cersei Lannister. She truly deserves the Iron Throne. I originally loved Robert Baratheon, Ed Stark and Drogo, but they all died on me very quickly. Now, after all 6 seasons, I have to say that Cersei is truly an amazing character. I also loved Ramsay Bolton very much, as he was the sort of Hannibal Lecter of Westeros. His antics often ended with me proclaiming aloud, 'Oh Ramsay.'
>>
Walter Shakewill - Mon, 03 Apr 2017 10:05:26 EST 54PBc7Id No.207968 Reply
To tackle this subject from a philosophical point of view, I guess it's just impressive to see how much willpower Cersei has. Cersei is definitely a fearless hedonist with more emotional strength than any of the other characters. She never makes half-hearted moves, and she never tells the truth. Truly, she is a warrior woman like Robert Barathion, only Robert was a warrior on the battlefield while Cersei is a warrior at politics, a titan behind closed-doors.
>>
Walter Donningforth - Mon, 10 Apr 2017 18:38:31 EST KvXjjDsO No.208006 Reply
My favorite philosophical meaning is between Ned stark and vaerys before ned stark's eventual beheading. Where vaerys tries to explain his understanding of this as preternaturally related to his time in a theatrical troupe. And how he understands power and the realm the same way.
>>
Ian Blythestock - Tue, 11 Apr 2017 17:42:27 EST Z08uqMmD No.208011 Reply
My favorite character is Tyrion. I guess I find him relateable since I'm more of a behind the scenes type of leader, but he's pragmatic, a tactician, and takes the lead when he has to make difficult decisions for what he believes is the correct reasons.

Cersei is definitely a boss and a half and I have alot of respect for her "no half-measures" approach.

I liked Jon Snow alot in the books, but I feel like he's not been done justice in the show. He's a warrior baptized in fire, never groomed for leadership but assumed it because he was needed, rejecting tradition in favor of survival.

I guess that's what truly connects all of them for me, they were unassuming, thrust into great trials that challenged their lives, and rose above the adversity more powerful and defiant in the face of death.

They are all true survivors.

Danaerys is too emotional for me with her decision making. Which contradicts me support of Jon Snow since he ruined his well entrenched position vs the Bolton's to save his brother, but it's his brother ya know? I mean, I can let that slide. It'd be hard to watch a little sibling be massacred in front of you and doing nothing about it.

Zoroastrianism

View Thread Reply
- Sun, 15 Jan 2017 03:26:24 EST Vz5f1vq5 No.207599
File: 1484468784066.gif -(617831B / 603.35KB, 320x240) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. Zoroastrianism
Yo /pss/,

What do you recommend I read if I want to know more about Zoroastrianism? Specifically orthodox but I'm open to any good material on the subject. My limitedresearch so far keeps telling me that the original holy texts are all written in a language that doesn't really translate well, so unlike other religions I can't just go and read their holy book because I've had trouble understanding which texts are the equivalent of canon. I want to get a deeper understanding than just what's in the wikipedia article, Help a dude out?
7 posts and 2 images omitted. Click View Thread to read.
>>
Ghengis Dong - Wed, 29 Mar 2017 00:20:08 EST mQSzo9rp No.207952 Reply
1490761208047.jpg -(16427B / 16.04KB, 236x238) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>207950
>Did you get all that info from the site you linked?

Yup. But when I read over my post, I notice a couple necessary revisions and poorly worded parts which irk the shit out of me:

"Old Avesta" is not a historical term, but commonly refers to the original Gathas.

Our oldest manuscripts that reference them come from Hellenic Era scholars.

During the Arsacid, Seleucid ,and Parthian Empires (reign varied throughout the region, but roughly 3rd century BC to 3rd century AD), long periods of foreign rule and strife led to movements which attempted to reclaim/revive the heritage of the Achaemenid Empire (pre-Hellenic Persia) and its holy texts (the gathas).

The Sasanian Empire rising in the 3rd century AD would enforce a strict codified form of the religion which venerated these texts, the gathas, still preserved in archaic old -Persian from centuries prior (sometimes referred to itself as the old-Avesta).

In addition they would compile the bulk of the "Yasna", hymns and rituals deemed canon, which includes practices developed in the later Parthian period (hence why it differs linguistically and has been informally referred to as the "young-avesta")

Much of this literature would be lost during the muslim conquest of Persia, and later rediscovered by medieval and (eventually) modern scholars, further adding to the confusion.

Sorry it's a lot of information to condense. I swear my next post will actually cover the teachings and practices laid out in these texts. Philology just gets me hard I guess
>>
Ghengis Dong - Mon, 03 Apr 2017 14:46:48 EST taL6BOqF No.207969 Reply
1491245208202.jpg -(11210B / 10.95KB, 267x188) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>207952
Kay I'll begin with an examination of the original gathas:

In these verses Zoroaster gives devotion to Ahura-Mazda. The supreme being. http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/ahura-mazda

"Some of the words spoken of Ahura Mazdā (aka: Ohrmuzd) in the Avesta have echoes in Vedic celebrations of Mitra and Varuṇa. In one evidently archaic verse (Y. 41.3) his worshippers say to him, “We establish Thee as the god possessing good supernatural power (maya-), zealous, accompanied by aša,” while in the Gāthās Zoroaster hails him as “all-seeing” (Y. 45.4) and “seeing afar” (Y. 33.13), the one “whom none deceives” (Y. 43.6). The prophet also speaks of him as “clad in hardest stone” i.e. the sky (Y. 30.5), although he also uses terms which suggest an anthropomorphic concept, in keeping with general Indo-Iranian religious tradition, e.g. “the tongue of Thy mouth” (Y. 31.3, cf. Y. 28.11), “the hand with which Thou holdest. . .” (Y. 43.4). Zoroaster gave a wholly new dimension to his worship, however, by hailing him as the one uncreated God (Y. 30.3, 45.2), wholly wise, benevolent and good, Creator as well as upholder of aša

aša is Truth and is the highest virtue. It is counterposed by "drug" (sometimes "druj") the Lie. All evil stems from deception. Just as Mazda is the uncreated manifestation of truth and virtue he has an uncreated counterpart or 'twin' in the form of Angra Mainyu (aka: Ahriman).

"This is the Hostile Spirit, Angra Mainyu. Zoroastrian tradition (e.g., Bundahišn 1.3) states plainly what is adumbrated in the Gāthās, that Ahura Mazdā became the Creator (Av. Dadvah, Dātār, Pahl. Dādār)—this being his constant appellation—to destroy Angra Mainyu, and so to achieve a universe that was wholly good. In one Gathic verse he is said to have achieved creation by his “thought” (Y. 31.11), but elsewhere his instrument is said to have been his Holy or Bounteous Spirit, Spənta Mainyu"

The first of Ahura Mazdā’s creative acts was to emanate the six great Beings known from the tradition as the Aməša Spəntas ("ahuras" or Spirits in the original gathas). These along with Spənta Mainyu make 7 divine entities but it's not strictly speaking polytheistic

"The relationship of Ahura Mazdā to the six Aməša Spəntas is again a subtle one, and its closeness is expressed metaphorically by the prophet when he calls Ahura Mazdā the father of Aša and of Vohu Manah... but it is conveyed even more vividly by his addressing Ahura Mazdā now [sic] as “Thou,” now (when he conceives of him together with one or more of the Aməša Spəntas)

The cosmogony is preserved in later Pahlavi texts:
"He (Mazda)first shaped his creations in a spiritual (mēnōg) state, in the form of “bright, white fire” (Bundahišn 1.44). The creations remained in this state for 3,000 years. In the meantime Ahriman made his demonic creatures out of darkness. He then attacked the luminous world. Finally, the two spirits made a treaty (paymānag) to wage war for a limited period of time (a speculative duration of 9,000 or 12,000 years is given) in a well-defined arena: the world. The three stages in the cosmic drama were the (material) creation (bundahišn), which began with the treaty; the mixture (gumēzišn) of good and evil; and the separation (wizārišn) of evil from good. The last stage, however, was to fall outside historical time."

"The period of (material) creation, also to last 3,000 years, began after the treaty, when Mazda recited the Ahunwar (Av. Ahuna Vairiia) prayer, revealing to Ahriman his ultimate defeat and causing him to fall back into the darkness in a stupor, which lasted for the entire period of the creation. During this time Ohrmazd fashioned his creations in material (gētīg) form, by celebrating a “spiritual yasna” (Bundahišn 3.23). He placed each creation under the protection of one of the seven Amahraspands (Av. Aməša Spənta). First he created the sky (protected by Šahrewar, Av. Xšaθra Vairiia), which enclosed the world like the shell of an egg (cf. Bailey, pp. 135-36). The second creation was water (protected by Hordād, Av. Haurvatāt), which filled the lower half of the “egg.” The third creation, earth (protected by Spandārmad, Av. Spənta Ārmaiti), shaped like a flat disk, floated on the primeval waters. On it stood the fourth, fifth, and sixth creations, respectively the single plant or tree (protected by Amurdād; Av. Amərətāt), the uniquely created bull (protected by Wahman, Av. Vohu Manah), and the first man, Gayōmard (Av. Gaiiō.marətan, protected by Ohrmazd himself). The seventh creation, fire (protected by Ardwahišt; Av. Aṧa Vahišta), was said (e.g., Bundahišn 3.8) to have permeated all other creations. During the 3,000 years of the period of material creation these creations were motionless, and the sun stood still in the middle of the sky.


I will detail in another post the more nuanced aspects of these creations and how they relate to man, and hopefully begin to expand over how these teachings are put to practice. Sorry for the walls of text
>>
Ghengis Dong - Mon, 03 Apr 2017 17:04:31 EST taL6BOqF No.207971 Reply
>>207969
sorry for so many problems with the characters/accents. When the thread is expanded it reads as normal.

nb

"Ethics"

View Thread Reply
- Fri, 10 Mar 2017 18:49:27 EST YXMsMuFM No.207869
File: 1489189767598.jpg -(494515B / 482.92KB, 1152x1600) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. "Ethics"
So, CRISPR is coming into its own. If you don't know about this new gene-engineering technique, then check this link:

http://www.yourgenome.org/facts/what-is-crispr-cas9

Essentially it's a rehash of a natural system found in protists that's now used to make targeted and precise edits in any genome the user wants. It's revolutionizing genetical biology world-wide, but the research into its obvious health implications is stymied by so called ethics in most of the first world.

So I'd like to discuss ethics and science. I'm just not talking about CRISPR, but general modern miracles of science that's hampered by old-world thinking like surrogacy, embryonic stem-cell research or replacement of mitochondria in fertilized cells Which can heal an inherited, rare and lethal decease but is outlawed in most of the world because courts decided the resulting child ends up with "three parents", even though the child only share mitochondrial DNA with the donor.


Now obviously I'm on the liberal side of the debate here, but I wanna know what /pss/ think about these new technologies. Should we play "god" in order to save/improve lives, or is there a thin red line Humanity shouldn't cross? Are these ethical concerns really grounds for outlawing certain possible techniques, or are these ethics remnants of a world where life was the realm of religion?
>>
Frederick Chezzlewick - Sat, 11 Mar 2017 15:20:44 EST d4DXKOh3 No.207871 Reply
Ignoring personal experiences due to a nephew dying at the age of 7 from a genetic disease, fucking hell yeah we need to play God.

We will need all the tools we can get to ensure that humanity will survive the coming 10,000 years and won't end up as a bunch of fossils.
>>
Cyril Gadgekeg - Fri, 17 Mar 2017 19:13:33 EST 4+oWREai No.207900 Reply
>>207869
Speaking as one that was born with a unique and extremely rare disease, yes. Yes, let's "play god". It's one thing to only give this tech to the elites so they can change their DNA to make them into supreme geniuses and everyone else becomes a slave caste.

It's another thing to cure disease. Imagine reversing down syndrome and these one's can actually lead a life of greater potential.

Only people that disagree with such a thing are religious goobers and or people that have no idea what it's like to live with an illness.

David Pakman recently with Matthew Liao on this very subject: http://philtech.io/class-blog/2016/11/the-crispr-future-might-be-a-little-blurred/ (not the interview. it's currently for members atm. )

The idea of being cured yet having religious morons taking that cure away from me and others infuriates me. It's like those moral turds that go against assisted suicide when someone is dying from terminal cancer. Who are these people? Where did they get their nerve?

Fuck your ethics! Give me the goods, doc!

Report Post
Reason
Note
Please be descriptive with report notes,
this helps staff resolve issues quicker.