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


Discord Now Fully Linked With 420chan IRC

Curated Society

View Thread Reply
- Wed, 14 Feb 2018 03:50:57 EST 39IBXNMV No.208728
File: 1518598257318.jpg -(65051B / 63.53KB, 1280x720) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. Curated Society
>Essentially the Authoritarian Left-Libertarian paradise everyone wants to live in:

Religion is banned outside of a personal philosophical context.
Essentially meaning religion as an oranized entity and force is illegal. However religious texts,images and iconography would still be available for individual study via an internet 3.0, libraries, museums and distributed archives. Some religious architecture of significance would obviously have to be preserved.

As for the rest of society I'm making the assumption that humaniry is going to likely destroy itself and be replaced by machines. However being in North America I would advoacte the cessation of poor land use and misuse of resources.

Personally I like a lot of the benefits of the American Way of Life. But unfrotunately it's going to go away forever if we dont invest ourselves intellectually,financially, societally and physically. As for the rest of the world I dont really give a shit about them. Being a Canadien or a US Citizen is a real priviledge, despite one's heritage.
19 posts and 7 images omitted. Click View Thread to read.
>>
Barnaby Snodwill - Sun, 18 Feb 2018 12:25:05 EST hbTtukSa No.208755 Reply
1518974705356.jpg -(56562B / 55.24KB, 700x348) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
I've been thinking how most politicians could be replaced by extras from central casting without too much effort. Its a very novel idea considering how useless they are;politicians not extras.
>>
Clara Smallham - Wed, 21 Feb 2018 23:40:54 EST 2qiFtTs9 No.208777 Reply
racism is curated by white peoploe

Indoors

View Thread Reply
- Mon, 19 Feb 2018 03:02:56 EST Vz5f1vq5 No.208757
File: 1519027376325.png -(35166B / 34.34KB, 198x242) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. Indoors
If you had to do an Anne Frank and stay indoors for an unknowable but at least several years time, and you knew for a fact that you could never go outside for risk of being caught, would you prefer to have a window (or possible a live video feed) of your immediate surroundings, or would you prefer no window, as to not tempt yourself into wanting to go outside when you cannot?
>>
Basil Brookfuck - Mon, 19 Feb 2018 16:40:13 EST fOlLozee No.208760 Reply
it'd be so much better to have a window are you retarded?
>>
Lillian Sabberham - Mon, 19 Feb 2018 22:30:42 EST 9zW8Ti/l No.208763 Reply
I've basically lived like that for the last 5 years, and having internet access is probably the only reason I didn't put a bullet in my head.

Theory

View Thread Reply
- Sun, 11 Feb 2018 23:32:12 EST vU7xlEnh No.208717
File: 1518409932751.jpg -(3171B / 3.10KB, 196x200) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. Theory
I have a theory as to the purpose of this reality. I think, thru a variety of means, this reality is how god learns to be alone and powerless. Every life lived eventually comes to this conclusion. We are all alone and powerless before the unknown. The more we desire the more we suffer. This is how god learns desirelessness. He watches us try to survive, to have eachother, and to understand, and he sees us fail on all accounts inevitably.
And so he learns its okay to be alone, powerless, and confused. I don't think god fully understands what's really happening. This shit is making me want to fucking kill myself so badly. Please help.
7 posts and 2 images omitted. Click View Thread to read.
>>
Eugene Siggleforth - Thu, 15 Feb 2018 19:18:56 EST blmfRlfa No.208744 Reply
1518740336378.png -(288870B / 282.10KB, 458x301) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>208735
The alien wanker is oddly relatable to Vishnu who is the sleeping god in whose dream is the universe. Brahma the creator god sits on the lotus that represents divine energy and divine grace, and the lotus grows from the navel of Vishnu.

20. An important function of myth: how to live a human life
https://youtu.be/W6xuh8v98r8
>>
Henry Chinderridge - Sat, 17 Feb 2018 01:21:25 EST ZrOoKGT8 No.208752 Reply
>>208735
"Brahman is full of all perfections. And to say that Brahman has some purpose in creating the world will mean that it wants to attain through the process of creation something which it has not. And that is impossible. Hence, there can be no purpose of Brahman in creating the world. The world is a mere spontaneous creation of Brahman. It is a Lila, or sport, of Brahman. It is created out of Bliss, by Bliss and for Bliss. Lila indicates a spontaneous sportive activity of Brahman as distinguished from a self-conscious volitional effort. The concept of Lila signifies freedom as distinguished from necessity."
>>
Henry Chinderridge - Sat, 17 Feb 2018 01:26:05 EST ZrOoKGT8 No.208753 Reply
>>208752
I should probably add to that, that in other cases (non-Hindu) creativity transcends even God itself (as is the case with A.N. Whitehead and process philosophy) so who's to say.

Country Portfolios....Canada and U.S.A.

View Thread Reply
- Wed, 10 Jan 2018 09:40:31 EST TriMJvI1 No.208602
File: 1515595231668.gif -(662767B / 647.23KB, 2717x2342) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. Country Portfolios....Canada and U.S.A.
The world's second largest country by surface but relatively small in terms of population, Canada punches above its weight in economic terms.

A federation of former British colonies, Canada follows the British pattern of parliamentary democracy, and the UK monarch is head of state. Ties with the US are now vital, especially in terms of trade, but Canada often goes its own way.

Both English and French enjoy official status, and mainly French-speaking Quebec - where pressure for full sovereignty has abated in recent years - has wide-ranging cultural autonomy. Indigenous peoples make up around 4% of the population.

Canada is one of world's top trading nations - and one of its richest. Alongside a dominant service sector, Canada also has vast oil reserves and is a major exporter of energy, food and minerals.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-16841111

The USA is the world's foremost economic and military power, with global interests and an unmatched global reach.

America's gross domestic product accounts for close to a quarter of the world total, and its military budget is reckoned to be almost as much as the rest of the world's defence spending put together.

The country is also a major source of entertainment: American TV, Hollywood films, jazz, blues, rock and rap music are primary ingredients in global popular culture.

The United States originated in a revolution which separated it from the British Crown. The constitution, drafted in 1787, established a federal system with a division of powers which has remained unchanged in form since its inception.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-16761057
6 posts omitted. Click View Thread to read.
>>
Augustus Cupperstadge - Sat, 10 Feb 2018 18:03:40 EST tBJp2aGG No.208701 Reply
>>208693

Take an amnesiac person and drop them in downtown Toronto. Ask them what country they think they're in.
>>
Jenny Mottingsatch - Sat, 10 Feb 2018 21:02:07 EST Kpl02ca1 No.208704 Reply
>>208701
Your myopia is staggering.
If you dropped a Canadian in Toronto...they would probably correctly guess they are in Canada. What kind of evidence do they have access to? I mean, if you dropped any random english speaking person in the middle of Sydney they might guess they are in New York, but they also might guess London. If the person in Toronto could see the combination of English and French signage, they would have better odds of being right than most other major english speaking cities.

The amnesiac in question would presume it is whatever major city whatever history or world culture they remember and are familiar with. Otherwise, you would seem to be asking us to assume that the default, memory-less human consciousness is American, which is absurd. What's the point of this silly thought experiment?
>>
Phoebe Chonningtine - Sat, 10 Feb 2018 21:04:11 EST 8gq7GAVV No.208705 Reply
>>208701
People might not guess they're in Canada, but they will FOR SURE accurately guess they're NOT in the USA.

The USA always has that unique USA look. That "This is a rich country but the infrastructure looks worse than fucking South Africa." look.

Racism

View Thread Reply
- Thu, 28 Dec 2017 03:12:18 EST KAVbWdaM No.208576
File: 1514448738873.jpg -(13119B / 12.81KB, 480x336) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. Racism
Simple question. And I am looking for more insight into the line of thinking based on upbringing, and community ideals.

Why is it acceptable to call someone white, or black,l. But is taboo to call someone red or yellow?

Is it as simple as social conditioning? Or does it play a deeper part in the group psychology?
5 posts omitted. Click View Thread to read.
>>
Nathaniel Wimmlelat - Tue, 09 Jan 2018 13:46:07 EST ZS66X4xy No.208594 Reply
>>208591
Please read posts before you get all butthurt over them.
>>aren't accurate to what the entire world's views
In my post I said:
This version of the term dichotomy you describe is specifically a north american issue
Moreover you claim:
>>This is obviously just your personal views
>>You also seem to assume that the only people who's opinions matter are white
Fuck. You. You don't know me man, how dare you tell me what my opinions are?
I was providing historical context for the history of the terms for color, and specifically the way they're used in NA. 'Black' means 'aboriginal' in Australia, but you don't get huffy about that? If you can't hear someone dispassionately describe the history of racism without automatically assuming the person talking about it is racist, you're either incredibly simple minded or a closet racist yourself.
It's obviously not the case that the people to whom these terms were applied opinion doesn't matter. Of course their opinion matters, but it's not germane to the question of the OP, which is why did the terms come to be seen as they are? Answering that question requires us to specify that the use of those english color terms to signify races is nearly a wholly white invention, which makes those terms etic demonyms, so an emic understanding of them is both irrelevant and confusing to comprehending their origin. Ergo, duh Natives had names for white people, but you can guarantee among them wasn't the english word 'white' (unless they were talking to English people.) When used in today's society, sure english speaking people will use white to refer to white people because that's the norm (that white people established) -- but that doesn't change the fact that it doesn't carry the same connotation of offensiveness that red or yellow do, which is again, OPs point. Otherwise, why would there have been the need for invention of different english slurs for whites, like cracker, honky, howlie, etc? Do you see how my post addresses OP's question, while your post just gets huffy and defensive about how that can't be the explanation, and does nothing to provide it's own theory?

In summary, you need to check yourself before you wreck yourself. Attacking someone who ostensibly you agree with just because you don't like the content of the information they're giving out (or because you failed to read the whole context of the post as stated within it and then go off assuming 'hey, you didn't put this in it's real context you racist bastard!') is a great way to demonstrate whether or not you're an asshole, and a great way to lose allies in an argument.
>>
Jarvis Cravinglick - Wed, 10 Jan 2018 08:40:25 EST 8gq7GAVV No.208601 Reply
>>208597
Fun fact, I was discussing this with a gay guy at some party and some random guy walked past us and gave the gay guy shit for saying "faggot" within the context of the conversation.
It was just so absurd.
>>
Shit Blipperfun - Fri, 26 Jan 2018 23:11:59 EST 9zW8Ti/l No.208633 Reply
>Is it as simple as social conditioning? Or does it play a deeper part in the group psychology?

In the grand scheme of things, it's simply social conditioning. Group identity is made by the use of certain terms, and the rules of these terms can be pretty esoteric. In Australia for instance, it's almost encouraged for people to use the most insulting terms possible for their friends. Of course, people outside the friendship group using such terms would be considered insulting, but by the same token being overly formal would be considered an insult on it's own. Every culture has these implicit and explicit rules regarding social etiquette.

>Why is it acceptable to call someone white, or black,l. But is taboo to call someone red or yellow?

Specifically about these terms, like someone else said, that's an American way of doing things. "Red" and "yellow" were pretty common until the 60s/70s as I understand it. The terms became taboo for the same reason they were used. They connote otherness, illegitimacy, whereas "whiteness" (and, in black communities, "blackness") connotes authenticity.

There's actually a really good book called "Appropriating Blackness" that explains how the black community started to strictly police it's own ideas of "blackness" and exclude members of it's own community (especially gay people) on the grounds that they were undermining that group identity.

My thought: What did the greats get WRONG?

View Thread Reply
- Thu, 28 Sep 2017 04:13:02 EST tKRmy9hF No.208440
File: 1506586382687.jpg -(727321B / 710.27KB, 1200x1759) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. My thought: What did the greats get WRONG?
Everyone remembers the greats for what they got right. But what about their follys? I was just about to start googling when I thought this might make a good thread. I'm more of a philosophy fanboy and am not well read. I hope we have some philosophy wizards here who can enlighten everyone about this.

My reasoning, I want these men to be humanized. I want myself and others to be able to see them as men with faults and contradictions and not unapproachable gods.
5 posts omitted. Click View Thread to read.
>>
Lydia Trotbanks - Sat, 30 Dec 2017 22:16:30 EST PwzxhROR No.208580 Reply
>>208458

Where does Plato say the 'forms' can be mathematically defined? Is there a source for this? Because if so, then the people who should rule the 'polis' are not philosophers (those who are best at perceiving or gaining some 'Truth'), but instead, mathematicians. A field of study I don't think the greeks even considered as existing in 500BC
>>
Priscilla Bashfoot - Sun, 31 Dec 2017 14:01:52 EST XUUNgMgt No.208582 Reply
>>208535

Modern mathematicians that have a naive knowledge of philosophy. Once you begin learning about logic and foundations, you encounter many non standard models of arithmetic. The easy way to think of it is a mathematical multiverse in the same way people talk of the possibility of physical multiverses. Why are the physical laws what they are? Similarly, one could ask why is this what the natural numbers are if there are other things that match its description and structure?

Statements in mathematics should only be considered as true when this claim is restricted to a single mathematical structure. There are many different mathematical structures with different properties, and no one of them has any inherent claim to be the "real" mathematical universe. There are claimants to the title of mathematical universe, for instance the class of all sets V, but it can always be expanded and doesn't contain all objects encountered in mathematics.

If we have no conception of what the real mathematical universe is, what can we say about what is out there?

humor me please on what you would do to help someone

View Thread Reply
- Fri, 10 Nov 2017 09:03:52 EST Pl+UfWe9 No.208521
File: 1510322632042.gif -(1554544B / 1.48MB, 500x500) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. humor me please on what you would do to help someone
Paradox of logic and spirituality and the dichotomy of self


He's on a path that cant be reversed and we can't force a river to bend, it has to flow to its natural whims. As this
cycle he has is about to end, we have to find the catalyst that hold together his psyche in an unhealthy manner. This is his defense mechanism of equal parts dismissive and destructive, meaning when he feels threatened he tries to defuse and disassociate the meaning of the consequences of his actions that is conditioning him in a negative way.

This defensive mechanism is the thing that has tricked him that he can survive like this, in perpetual self-destruction
affecting the people around him. The pain of losing what HE think he has lost and the loves and passions associated is
what is keeping him from the final catharsis and becoming his true self. Cody is in a sense reversed his negative and positive selves(which are in every way equal, one and the same and also the greater sum of their parts as a whole) to their positions.

I picture codys energy and form that is as inverted being yet thats is just as much as cody as the all badass parts of
cody, because his natural instinct (again this is all an initial summation) is to protect the things and emotions and passions he values the most. Like a black hole or as an abyss I described earlier or a living organism of emotion that has form and is formless. This energy around him that is controlling his actions to accept the wrong kind of energy
that festers and feds this almost parasite that rejects everything and everyone

Its appearent this feeling/form/energy has become more and more tangible in a sense that it has spread to you guys

Its almost like you cant see any positive thing anymore in him and youre too exhausted to deal with anymore.
He's trying to bury it deeper(His good self) into the center of this abyss and its area of effect is spreading.


For me, being someone who has just recently come into this collective and my initial observations/interactions; When it
comes to cody. I see the light in there, its deep in there in that haze but in there.
The only way to bring that light back is to help channel our positive energies to feed this energy that is 'protecting'
him.

This could mean a varity of things/solutions really and I have one initial idea that popped in my head instantly imo.

Its simple really; We dive to the center of all that abyss together. And with what previously brought us together in the first
place, the music. If as a collective, we are serious about getting out there and fight for love and peace we have to put aside our individual selves and share and become one by nurturing that fleeting beauty within us that we keep chasing after
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>
Cyril Bivinghare - Tue, 05 Dec 2017 16:17:29 EST Sm7nPCsL No.208560 Reply
I think you are thinking the correct way but not necessarily the correct thoughts, because you sound like you are on to something, but I don't know who cody is.
>>
Jenny Draddledale - Mon, 25 Dec 2017 00:24:43 EST hGJqk5Sv No.208572 Reply
Cody wants to lick your booty hole

What is even evil?

View Thread Reply
- Wed, 27 Sep 2017 17:54:17 EST YXMsMuFM No.208438
File: 1506549257864.png -(69205B / 67.58KB, 292x191) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. What is even evil?
So there's this discussion I've been having on /b/ about belief, and it naturally evolved to banter about the nature of evil.

So I'm pretty much a relativist, because firstly I think humanity embodies both sides of the dichotomy as a fact of nature i.e. how we're made and how we perceive the world, and secondly because I believe there's no meaning beyond what humans the ones humans apply to the universe.

Yet I do find myself agreeing to being on the "good" side.

Why is this?
16 posts and 5 images omitted. Click View Thread to read.
>>
Martin Clagglebury - Sun, 19 Nov 2017 15:04:56 EST /iCKvJxT No.208541 Reply
>>208438
First, establish what is commonly accepted as "good" and "evil".
The most popular human forms of evil have been established throughout the ages.
Murder, rape, thievery, lying, wrath, and hatred.
The most popular forms of good have also been established.
Charity, honor, truth, kindness, modesty and love.
These are highly prototypical expressions of what "good" and "evil" are.
Now the question, why do you believe yourself to be on the "good side"?
Is good and evil something we are born with? Something inherent in a soul? If a soul is a real thing?
Or are we products of environment? Would you be the same person if you were born and raised in a slum like downtown detroit? Would you be the same if you were raised by only one of your parents?
If an african american man was born in a nice suburb, would he still sell crack? #roasted
And how much does culture affect? Do the movies and stories you were told as a child and even now affect your perception, affect your morals? And when you finally do realize that your set of beliefs are manufactured by external stimuli, you will see yourself as nothing more than a collection of experiences and impulse responses, knee jerks that tweak your perceptions and affect how you understand and respond to future experiences. Seeing beyond the veil of subjectivity you discover that no objective truth is observable and that you are the ultimate judge of reality.
Enter the wild, wild, west. A cowboy riding a horse, a gun on his hip. He has written and signed his own constitution, of what is just, just for him. What is right and what is wrong when he stick his gun in your mouth? Will you die for a philosophy? As far as the cowboy sees its survival of the quickest..
So why are you "good"? Because life has been good to you? Because your life has shown you goodness so it exists within you? You obviously didn't make the choice to be good on a basis of logical axioms or you wouldn't asking why your good..And when you see through your own bullshit perhaps then you will discover what you really are. Nosce te ipsum.
>>
Cedric Beggleshit - Fri, 08 Dec 2017 21:15:18 EST NMygqr00 No.208561 Reply
>>208438
Hard relativism assumes that all moral values are relative... you answered your own question
>>
Betsy Brookbury - Sun, 10 Dec 2017 16:24:39 EST Sm7nPCsL No.208562 Reply
>>208561

Is then the notion that morals should be relative, is that notion relative? Is absolute morality permissible in relative morality?

Should i feel guilty for hating homophobes?

View Thread Reply
- Sat, 18 Nov 2017 07:26:05 EST qJ30WOYM No.208540
File: 1511007965459.png -(78814B / 76.97KB, 1280x509) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. Should i feel guilty for hating homophobes?
I live in Australia and we found out on wednesday that Homophobes are now in the minority in Australia. Should i feel guilty for hating them? because they are a minority i am legitimately confused on how i should feel toward them.
6 posts and 3 images omitted. Click View Thread to read.
>>
Reuben Dibblechere - Sun, 26 Nov 2017 21:11:41 EST z/FiZpQC No.208549 Reply
1511748701792.jpg -(62952B / 61.48KB, 397x293) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>208540
Hate is too much. There is no need to hate them.

But there is no need to sympathize with them, either. Fuck em.
>>
Basil Pittbury - Mon, 27 Nov 2017 15:03:29 EST 1kfT+DW9 No.208550 Reply
1511813009041.jpg -(144646B / 141.26KB, 1024x611) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
I've been struggling with where the line is drawn, I use to believe that people are fundamentally good and society has a place for everyone.

This last year + has really changed how I view my fellow man. I was a pacifist for well over a decade and now I see that as completely naive.

If you're a bigot or anti-worker the least I can do is hate you.
>>
Martha Ponkinfitch - Tue, 28 Nov 2017 18:24:12 EST YXMsMuFM No.208551 Reply
1511911452385.jpg -(47698B / 46.58KB, 580x525) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>208550

>If you're a bigot or anti-worker the least I can do is hate you.

Dude just chill. We're all imperfect humans.

Hate is such a powerful thing. Disagree, deny, resist or revolt sure. Hate though, nah dude that is for lesser men.

>This last year + has really changed how I view my fellow man. I was a pacifist for well over a decade and now I see that as completely naive.

Take care not to flip entirely. A lot of people with strong opinions tend to do this, maybe because having strong opinions is more integral to them than having the "correct" opinions.
Just chill, remember this Earth is at first man vs man, not idea vs. idea.
If you don't accept the world as-is, a complicated mess of a place hell even in your personal life, you gonna have a hard and bad time.

Do you think important people of the past, who weren't important in their time

View Thread Reply
- Sun, 22 Oct 2017 16:31:33 EST tKRmy9hF No.208470
File: 1508704293015.jpg -(31320B / 30.59KB, 928x510) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. Do you think important people of the past, who weren't important in their time
ever thought themselves fools for writing it all down?

I mean we have all these books, written long before the telegraph or even the printing press. We have records, documents, journals, short stories tales and fables. Do you think the people writing these seemingly frivolous and pointless logs containing their dreams hopes opinions plans debts and whimsies, ever thought to themselves the way we today do, "What's the point of writing a book? What's the point of keeping a journal? I'm a nobody. It doesn't matter. I'll never be famous. I'm going to play videogames/watch tv/movies/jerk off/do yard work/eat food.". Except minus the modern stuff they obviously didn't have, replace with old timey equivalents.

My point is, i've been mulling it over and I don't think they thought in those terms. They didn't have kardasians, they didn't have instant porn on tap. When they got bored, they contemplated life, they wrote things down. Not in aetherial online forums. They wrote them down in a way that they would be kept and organized. Not lost and scattered to the winds of the internet. They probably didn't expect anyone to read their crap (i'm talking about normal people who later became known through their journals and works, not people who were doing multigenerational work at the time and expected their shit to be read down the line.) and didn't care either. It was for them.

What I'm also getting at is that we're rarely doing it "for me" anymore. Like everyone I know is doing things so they can...SHOW it to the world. So they can, get some kind of sliver of fame. I don't understand it. Fame is stupid. Self fulfilment is what matters, you'll find that out after you get fans. It even will grate on you, because you will hate them for loving you, because you don't love yourself...it angers you that they see something that you don't consider to exist. It bothers you that they get to love you, but you don't get to love yourself.

Idk. I think tech is fucking us up badly. Socially. It's getting fucking creepy. Like really, really fucking creepy. Kids have their faces in their phones all the time now and I always thought it was bullshit when adults would say that growing up but now...it's creepy, like I said. I'm only 27. And shit is getting fucking weird

Was just thinking all this while journaling for the first time in years. I've been putting my phone in a drawer recently...idk why. It creeps me the fuck out. When I can visually see it, it grips me. I can't explain it and it just creeps me out badly. When it's not physically on me, or visible, I feel differently. My anxiety goes the fuck away. I have had crippling anxiety for the last 4 fucking years (when I got my first smartphone...) and have had no idea why, or what changed me. These shit's are fucking creepy. I pretty much use my pc again when needed now. Feels much more normal. I don't even use it often. Mostly for movies/tv, but I only watch maybe a few shows a day, whereas with the phone, I was watching dozens of yt videos and random distracting horse shit. Something about the touchscreen...it grabs your monkey brain harder. Another note, I can't use pc on acid or shrooms, but I can use a touchscreen fine. It's fucking bizarre.

Anyway, this turned into kind of a rant/ramble but it started as a simple thought. I was wondering what the differences were between us and them after having the initial contemplation on what their intention was for their personal journalings. As a form of personal entertainment and remembrance at a later date, or as a means to be "remembered in history somehow" as I personally have fantasies about as a "modern man".

TL;DR
An open discussion about humanity pre and post technological revolution.

Posted in /b/ but here might be better. Also, why the fuck do we not have a Philosophy board?
3 posts omitted. Click View Thread to read.
>>
Matilda Clucklestone - Tue, 14 Nov 2017 03:08:15 EST Iw2FXFb1 No.208533 Reply
1510646895885.jpg -(141136B / 137.83KB, 437x606) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>208476
For example China had ten ages in their mythology that spans back beyond what is known. Of what little history remains the dating is dramatically inaccurate. Anyways, the reason that is is because all the sages were killed and the books chronologing those eras were burned.

If you go back farther, history was remembered through storytellers, poets, and bards or whatever. The stories were fluid, altered over time, and varied per teller, until they were written. The story of Beowulf being the most obvious example. That tale was told countless times taking on different meanings while the core premise probably remained. Its continuous development occurring in spoken form becomes stunted in writing. From the novel a movie, diluted for the worse, to inspired variations like the 13th Warrior, its re-presented in another medium. Scroll credits.

The storytellers of the distant past who kept humanity's lessons and history alive across many generations are unknown. Certainly there is power in being the keeper of culture, its flame, but it was about what they told, not who they were. A select few people can make movies, many can write, everyone can tell stories.
>>
Fuck Diffingridge - Tue, 14 Nov 2017 20:15:20 EST oX3f4KlI No.208534 Reply
The internet as a historical document will outlast every notebook journal diary or folio in existence.
>>
Eliza Gemmerwell - Sat, 18 Nov 2017 06:57:53 EST qJ30WOYM No.208539 Reply
>>208534

and yet finding anything of worth is like finding a certain needle in a pile of needles.

Atavism?

View Thread Reply
- Tue, 06 Dec 2016 15:26:13 EST Y5UP2WQL No.207410
File: 1481055973605.jpg -(8587B / 8.39KB, 200x246) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. Atavism?
Does anyone else have a bad reaction to the mentally handicapped? Am I literally hitler?
43 posts and 4 images omitted. Click View Thread to read.
>>
Samuel Shittinglock - Mon, 06 Nov 2017 15:19:22 EST nX761Sq0 No.208503 Reply
>>208500
>all animals took their rights, or they didn't get them.
No, animals operated without rights. A lion catching a gazelle isn't the lion taking a right. Rights are societal constructs. They exist only as much as a society is willing to uphold them.

>There isn't a legal system in place to stop you from being killed
Just because I can't stop a murderer with an explanation of my rights doesn't mean that they don't exist. The capacity for a right to be violated doesn't prove its nonexistence.
>>
Priscilla Pennernerk - Tue, 07 Nov 2017 14:30:14 EST wRqF/W2w No.208504 Reply
ITT: People conflate arguing about semantics with ethical debate.

Spoiler: The fuck does it matter how we describe these things? Isn't what really matters (and the point of the thread) what we should or shouldn't do viz. other people (i.e. ethical debate) rather than what we do or don't call our ideas about what to do? Rights, capacities, justification...all just human meat-sounds to cover up our incomprehension of how we ought to behave or what even reality is...mistaking semantics for epistemology or ethics, a very primitive kind of misunderstanding...
>>
Fuck Diffingridge - Tue, 14 Nov 2017 20:24:27 EST oX3f4KlI No.208537 Reply
>>208503
Belief in biological rights is a sure sign of a social darwinist.

This t-shirt Ad uses Nazi Swastikas to share Peace, Love and Freedom

View Thread Reply
- Sat, 15 Jul 2017 12:32:42 EST 7Y5vwbb4 No.208275
File: 1500136362952.jpg -(114365B / 111.68KB, 470x560) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. This t-shirt Ad uses Nazi Swastikas to share Peace, Love and Freedom
This video advertises a clothing line which uses redesigned Swastikas as the main theme. Apparently the aim of this Ad is to destroy the stigmatization of the Nazi Swastika connecting the symbol to new meanings: Peace, Love and Freedom. Very interesting

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1V0hVmi0C40
9 posts omitted. Click View Thread to read.
>>
Edward Gaffingway - Sat, 26 Aug 2017 15:38:42 EST e8hfwBjx No.208404 Reply
>>208275
>This video advertises a clothing line which uses redesigned Swastikas as the main theme. Apparently the aim of this Ad is to normalize and de-stigmatize the Nazi Swastika, without effectively connecting the symbol to the new meanings. Very interesting
Fixed for clarity. Next time don't take a group at face-value
>>
Edward Gaffingway - Sat, 26 Aug 2017 15:39:39 EST e8hfwBjx No.208405 Reply
Also, caturday > lolcats
Never forgetti
>>
Thomas Lightforth - Wed, 04 Oct 2017 11:42:05 EST Sm7nPCsL No.208455 Reply
1507131725153.jpg -(51855B / 50.64KB, 439x335) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
If they really wanted to steal it, they should steal it from Hitler himself. They could achieve this if they created a film about kid Hitler. In the film, Hitler would be struggling and running around in his harsh life. A group of people try to help Hitler and make Him come up with a dream to cling on for hope, like a vision.

But then something terrible happens and through this the swastika becomes a symbol of Hitlers broken hope for the future and the terrible consequences that had for the world. The message being that you should not be like Hitler, you should have hope, the swastika being worn to remind ourselves what happens if we have no hope.

who even am I

View Thread Reply
- Tue, 18 Jul 2017 22:28:27 EST Q9kaYENz No.208281
File: 1500431307328.jpg -(154217B / 150.60KB, 767x581) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. who even am I
I had an interaction with my daughter just now and it spiraled into some sort of existential terror

My son and daughter were in their room supposed to be going to sleep, but I heard her come out of her room and was just coming out to give me a hug.

I didn't react negatively to this - I don't want to say because I'm a nice person - but just because I am the way that I am. You might wonder, why would anyone react negatively to something like that? I don't know. But there are people in the world that would have.

They would have screamed at her for coming out of her room when she's supposed to be in bed, and she would have gone back to bed heartbroken when all she wanted was a hug. And thus the relationship between her and her parent would have been damaged (even further than it probably already would have been).

And when thinking this through, I thought "Well, I sure am glad that I'm not that way." But isn't that strange? I didn't get to decide or choose to be the way that I am. Or at the very least, I didn't choose to be the type of person that chooses to be the way that I am. I just randomly rolled these "stats".

It's horrifying to imagine everything that I could have been.
16 posts and 5 images omitted. Click View Thread to read.
>>
Molly Worthingstone - Fri, 22 Sep 2017 05:17:26 EST qFV6v+im No.208433 Reply
>>208427

How would you even be able to distinguish between random and unpredictable?
>>
Matilda Dirryhall - Sun, 24 Sep 2017 03:59:49 EST HNJfvXnY No.208437 Reply
>>208433

The distinction I think is between a lack of knowledge concerning the mechanics of a physical-causal system and the impossibility of their being a complete physical-causal model of certain systems. I'm not an expert on this though, that's why I say to investigate bell's theorems. The words of the physicist can aid the philosopher in mentally organizing his ontology.
>>
Barnaby Cungerbudge - Fri, 29 Sep 2017 01:35:49 EST XypP1lD0 No.208445 Reply
>>208406
Oh well it looks like I'm a hard determinist then lol. I don't think I was making a case for free will from an "objective" perspective. But nonetheless I think that thus objective free will is distinct from a subjective one precisely because of our finite nature. That is, we can know objectively or logically that our free will is an illusion but we can never subjectively know that. Does that make sense at all?

Political Science

View Thread Reply
- Wed, 23 Aug 2017 13:37:19 EST vmu9ElA5 No.208397
File: 1503509839765.jpg -(62058B / 60.60KB, 640x631) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. Political Science
Any Political Science majors?
Why is there so much theory in the course? Does it have any relevance in real life, or is it just academics being academics?
2 posts omitted. Click View Thread to read.
>>
Dr. M !gWLn19/oKs - Fri, 01 Sep 2017 21:54:41 EST mXz0pukj No.208414 Reply
>>208397
Yes, my undergrad was PoliSci.

You need the theory to genuinely understand political concepts.

No disrespect, but clearly you're the quantitative type. That's great and all, but what knowledge base will you draw on that's not a machine?

Understanding the theories and concepts about why things are structured and occur the way they do help with intuitive thought process and making estimated guesses.

The vast knowledge accumulated from, say, Poli Sci (we take IR as well)+History minor+ Religious studies minor is amazing. You really understand how politics works from a ridiculous amount of perspectives and vantage points.

But I'm a bias academic so. The way I see it is, if you took my approach + maintained the quantitative, you're somebody who actually understands them, yet is able to transform that into quantitative data and legitimize Political Science as a "science".
>>
Edwin Gacklewell - Tue, 05 Sep 2017 21:19:32 EST cmOR3FR3 No.208417 Reply
I knew two guys with polisci degrees. One got a really good D.C. Job with the republicans then his mental illness made him just check out and his parents basically pay for him to be a homebody.

The other guy worked a low level job at google until some think tank hired him.

So the "usefulness" of the degree,like many others, is determined by how well you network.
>>
Phineas Winkindale - Sun, 24 Sep 2017 02:21:57 EST XypP1lD0 No.208436 Reply
>>208399
Ehh I am inclined to disagree with that. I'm not sure what you mean by studies, but I'm taking it to mean political studies? Theory as done in modern academic settings does move. pretty slowly due to what you mentioned, but I'm not sure how it would restrict anything.

Like a lot of ideas established in the US Constitution owe a lot to the works of John Locke. I don't think it would be restrictive to read his theories. For a more modern and influential political scientist, John Rawls' A Theory of Justice was inspired by Hume's skepticism and Kant's deonotlogical ethics.

As far as data goes, I'm finding it hard to understand why you think that an interpretation of data is distinct from theory. Isn't theory just another way of saying interpretation?

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