debate
Discord ID: 463068752725016579
34,246 total messages. Viewing 250 per page.
Prev |
Page 70/137
| Next
and if you dont want to vote to get those changes then thats on you
And someone who isn't paying attention to the issues and picks a name at random definitely doesn't know
But you've defended the virtue of their "effort"
example i wanted gay rights so i voted obama both times
at least u guys have a right to vote
i have a duty to vote
if i dont i can get fined
no matter how utter garbage the candidates are
oz?
i dont get the case you made @Beemann to not vote eqauls right to complain
If I have a contest and you join knowing the terms of the contest, why do you get to complain when it doesn't go your way?
Just sounds like a sore loser tbh
i joined there the reason why i get to
You made a contradictory statement
"I don't, but I do"
If I have a contest and you agree to the terms and then complain when you don't get your way, are you not just a sore loser?
wsorry started typing while i had a head thought
Oh ok
i can complain cause i contibuted to the contest
so i get to compalin if i feel i was unfairly judged
Why do you get to complain? You didn't build anything
You participated, you lost
The system worked, it did not go your way
your examples make no sense
If we have a contest for say, a cash prize, and you win, and I start bitching about it, I'm just being a sore loser, no?
It's childish behaviour. I knew the results could = my loss
and you didnt explain the extent of this hypothetical contest
I agreed to lose as well as win
It doesn't matter, it's just a contest
and taking it way off topic
It's 100% on topic. Do you know what an election is?
A contest
When you vote, you accept Trump winning implicitly
That is one of the results of the election
You willingly take part knowing that you are participating in a process that could elect Trump
and your contest example only helps my point
Ergo now that Trump has won, you should have already accepted it
What, that you're a sore loser?
im done you cant see it im dopne explaining it you dont want to se it fine but i tried
No, you've made a series of circular statements and then get mad when I use different examples to explain flaws with that reasoning beyond it simply being circular
no im getting frustrated becuase you are turning this into symantic debate and a circular debate and use some of the wtf examples ive ever seen but its fine agree to disagree
I havent turned this into a semantic debate in the slightest, and I'd love if you could point to where I used a circular argument
Voting for a third party can also be useful in the long run. Winning just 5% of the electorate secures public funding for the next election.
Crypto racist has a nice ring to it.
They're not really crypto-, though.
But it sounds cool
hey guys you know the 4 square political test?
does anybody else feel like it should be working on atleast 3-4 dimensions
sorta asking after discussion with right wing friend who in a geo-political aspect ends up being put as authoritarian typically, but on a personal level is very libertarian
over-complicating needlessly isn't worth a damn, but all the same the test(s) itself misses finer points of ones viewpoints
Might be a matter of changing the questions rather than the layout.
there's sapply for 3 dimensions
and 8values is 4 dimensions
8 values doesnt illustrate my political leaning via hypercubes tho
well... yeah, we can't perceive hypercubes
Maybe you can't
D:
):
Yeah, these tests aren't really that good. I think the majority are actually made to be push-polls. Furthermore it's really not obvious that political orientation should exist on any reasonable dimensional space.
Seems to me that you can directly measure the dimensionality of a political test by measuring the independence/orthogonality/correlation between questions.
OK. How do you define orthogonality?
Perpendicular
It's just the collinearity between responses to the test questions.
politiscales is my fave tho
would be cool if we had a channel to post test results, for easy comparison
Is it possible to opt out of discord policy change in regards to class action law suit?
https://twitter.com/BooDooPerson/status/1052922096802848768
if you are in EU area you dont need to do anything.
Gotcha
While I believe that the EU has such measures tied into GDPR (Article 77) to prevent this sort of change in a terms of service, simply overriding the companies choice. The US and some other countries do not have such a law. See https://xq.ms/4dI4k
Fallout 76 looks bad
looks like a waste of money
I think America is too lazy to have a civil war.
Or is it that there is not a greater humanitarian crisis that makes sense to do so.
We're not going to have a civil war nor should we. The only one we had was due to deep seeded, long standing issues from at least the founding of the nation. Only approximately 90 years later at great fear of one side winning out permanently did any such thing happen. Presently we have a much more stable form of government with disagreement on what's more along the lines of details than the big picture.
Well, most people yes, there is however a small revolutionary bunch that permanently causes trouble.
that bunch needs to be "purged" (=removed from position of power/influence).
@Timcast The Second Ref on Brexit is nothing more then the Trump is sucking Putins dick. These people lost and they lost their fucking minds. The entire establishment couldn't believe what just happened and talk of a second vote started immediately and has been growing from there. Name calling, wishing and being thankfull that 2 years has past so more old people are dead and can't vote leave again.
Project fear was kicked into over drive with a government trying to make to divorce process look as bad and as hard as possible.
We have not been giving what was promised and what the majority of people voted for.
The second vote is not grass roots, it is the biggest names in politics thinking the plebs made the wrong choice. They control the media and can make the outside world see what ever they want. A second ref would be an attack on the democratic process by the political and cultural elite who think they know better.
Much like the screaming banshees you have in the US backed up by celebs, this is a small group of children that have been stamping their feet for 2 years, They should be ignored.
There will be nothing stopping the brits from reapplying to the EU once they leave it
Except of course, the EU
Well, with things going the way they are right now, you might have been better off as a Member of the EU...
EU will be happy to take brits back and continue destroying their country
the EU might be authoritarian, but not THAT authoritarian...
When we leave and I mean leave, no common rule book, no open boarders, and we will start to see the benefits of being our own country, the EU will go full force with their plans of creating a USE and the people of the UK will see it all from the outside perspective. We will never join the EU again by choice.
May is one of the worst things hat could have happened to the UK. Sadly. Either she's that evil or that incompentent. Or both...
She an EU sycophant. She sees her self as no more than the custodian of the UK. She could of had statues made of her, now she'll be lucky if ppl don't dance on her grave.
Well, she deserves the (upcoming) Merkel treatment.
seems like many politicians in Germany are moving against Angie right now
Merkel is a fucking snake. How the fuck did she survive the last vote. She knows what she's doing.
Old people can vote
people 70+ and also many are indoctrinated to not vote AfD
So what's up with the UK? Y'all leaving or what?
Yes we are. It might take us a little longer than we hoped but we are getting out.
We SHOULD be, but too many people are NPCs scared of looking racist, so it's being halted a lot
Brexit will be dragged out forever and then diluted.
They are pushing for a second referendum and then they will likely keep backdoors open and weasel their way out of anything of substance.
No, that not it @Vigil This is far more to do with the elite dragging their heels.
It's a very middle class thing to hate Brexit
Middle-upper
It's fashionable, and most of the clout outside of the media is tag-alongs
I agree it's mainly the elite fuelling it though
@Vigil It's nearly time to send a letter to our MPs saying how much we dislike Chequers and would prefer a no deal than a bad deal.
Get them in just before they vote on it.
Lol the MP where I grew up goes to less than 50% of parliamentary debates or something like that
He believes his vote doesn't matter
GG
Do you believe in meme magic?
Is there a connection between Princeton's Global Consciousness Project and meme magic?
http://noosphere.princeton.edu/
Can you plot the global consciousness? http://global-mind.org/gcpdot/gcpchart.php
Hello, please allow me to introduce myself. I am a Pleb. But that doesn't matter. I was hoping that someone here could educate me on an older topic. I understand that the separating of children from parents at the border has stopped due to an executive order but I was wondering if anyone had sources to find out exactly what was happening to the parents and the children after being separated from each other?
Adults and children are held in separate facilities as they're processed. Adults are held until their hearings for asylum go through or they are deported. Children are held until they can be placed with a non-imprisoned relative, if none are found they go into the foster care system.
Thank you.
Global consciousness is a real phenomenon.
And meme magic is one of its examples, but there are numerous.
Religion is the most fundamental and pronounced example of group consciousness.
Group consciousness is nothing more than a shared perspective on reality.
The great psychologist and gnostic Jung discusses the idea of group consciousness and depth psychology extensively.
I would say that Manifest Destiny is another good example of an effectively applied group consciousness.
There's also the concepts of Chivalry and Bushido. Even though their founding was 6 centuries apart. They did formulate in two radically different parts of the world and held similar yet vastly different concepts.
They are two different expressions of feudalism.
Yes. It is easy to suggest that people, although from different walks of life and cultures, look at similar problems and come up with similar responses.
It is, it is also interesting to then note how well the Japanese were able to Westernize and quickly move away from feudalism.
I think Feudalism is inherently flawed and everyone recognized those flaws but they didn't have a better solution at the time. Until a new system was introduced and the people quickly adopted the new values simply because they saw it as inherently better. Perhaps not consciously, but it was a quick adoption due to just having a better idea. I think Jungian philosophy and theory is fascinating but I also believe it can be explained not through a shared subconscious but through people being people and even though our cultures are different we still have the same thought processes and with enough time and proper healthy debate will come to the same conclusions logically.
But I must to bed now. I have a busy day tomorrow and the hour is growing late.
We need a new holy crusade
We need to invade Venezuela
And Europe will start with SWeDeN
retake Constantinople
retake Antioch
retake Alexandria
restore the Pentarchate.
What a crazy story that was.
https://www.nytimes.com/1992/12/16/world/fischer-is-indicted-over-chess-match.html
Bobby Fischer in exile.
if only
we had the library of alexandria
Extradition on copyright grounds is cancer.
https://thatdailymusicblog.wordpress.com/2012/03/18/extradition-a-dangerous-precedent-for-the-digital-age/
We have been here before. But we never learn:
"March 15, 1982: This UPI report so dated begins: โCalgary police said Monday they are concerned with the increasing number of women reporting unfounded rapes and may consider laying public mischief charges.โ"
"January-February 1982: False rape statistics for Calgary, Canada, the first two months of the year. There were nineteen reported rapes, seven of them turning out to be false. Not unfounded, but false."
All studies conducted before the memory holing of feminism indicate a rate of false rape allegations of about 40-80% at times.
Reclaim Byzantium!
@Timcast, the civility you seek doesnโt appear on the ballot; no choice on it will reverse the trend.
Actions have consequences:
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CUUR0000SA0R
Women stating "pay me or I'll say you raped me" are practicing extortion - a crime in many places. Men would do well to get it recorded or documented and go to the police immediately to file a report.
Who in their right mind would debate that?
Debate what?
So far as the numbers of founded vs. unfounded reports, that we will never know. Unfounded reports include intentionally filed false reports as well as ones which turned out not to have occurred but the victim may have had reason to believe it did. Examples of this is if you are drunk, have sex and black out recalling nothing. You can't know if you had drunk sex in which you were a willing participant or if you were taken advantage of while passed out. Both things do occur. In other cases it might be for example if you had parked your vehicle and return to discover it missing. The presumption made is that someone stole it but it also could have been towed, repossessed or relocated due to an event.
Then we also can't know how many reports are founded when it comes to this. The nature of the crime means there will seldom be video or audio. Any outside interaction may not be representative of what occurred behind closed doors. Through further interaction fences can be mended and bridges burned.
Further any evidence gained doesn't immediately indicate a crime as regular sexual intercourse can cause the very same things, tenderness, soreness, tearing and so on. Some men and women also enjoy things a bit risquรฉ which people might think were criminal. It ends up being she said and he said. So some reports may indeed be marked unfounded not because a crime didn't occur but because we lack evidence to say one did. Visa versa, circumstances could indicate one occurred when one in fact didn't.
You end up with a situation where few are proven one way or another while the vast majority linger due to insufficient information. Then those in either side could very well be wrongly placed merely due to circumstance. It's not something we'll ever have truly accurate numbers for. The best way to handle the situation though is to continue investigating claims as crimes until we have more information but record them differently. Instead of recording them as these crimes occurred record them as this many allegations have been levied. Then break it down further by how many were convicted and how many reports are marked unfounded.
A topic came up in general chat, thought the question would be better put here.
Why do people think eugenics is evil?
It's a critical part of almost all our biological infrastructure.
Yeah it is a better space for it. I'm not exactly *for* it but I know its a possibility again.
Memes will eventually be our main source of communication by 2050
Or sooner
Isn't abortion a form of eugenics?
I suppose it could be considered a facet of.
Abortion is indiscriminate, unless used purposefully to avoid things like downs
Generally my understanding is most of the work is done before that's come about.
But thats exactly it, eugenics won't be an idea that comes up from the libertarians or conservatives, as people think. it'll actually be the left.
You don't shoot unfit cows, you carefully breed ones with the qualities you want.
Right. So people don't have issues with the concept, they're just concerned that it would be misused?
it'll be the ones who dont mind abortions and while they say they love disabled people, will understand they can't uphold the economy unless a few fall on the sword
At this point we are just better off waiting for gene therapy rather than developing legal eugenics for the present day.
If you carefully breed cows you tend to shoot the weak ones less because there are less weak ones.
well yeah, gene expression is a cute way of enacting eugenics
I think the only moral and ethical way to handle gene therapy is to be indiscriminate in its application to health and capabilities.
I don't want a GATTACA society that has a society stratified based on genes.
I'd say as long as it weeds out diseases and disabilities I'm all for it. If people suck after birth for reasons of their own doing i'm cool with that.
I mean, if genes influence our performance, then any meritocratic society is at least going to be partly stratified based on genes.
But you cant' really have a laissez faire society and yet have such strict foundations.
Playing with eugenics would be perhaps the most dangerous power we could ever acquire.
a teifling has rights too!
We cannot give over are own genes over to capitalism and consumerism.
Any gene-therapy we do should be as available as a vaccine.
I'd agree, but it would come from a government level wouldn't it? At least thats what science fiction would propose. I'm usually very pro market, even when it comes to health care, but genetics is something everyone should have an equal foot on just as nature intended.
Imagine the conspiracy theories that people will come up with then...
About all the things they do to our genes. Like making us drones and genetically subservient beings.
Romansh should become the new lingua franca.
Change my mind.
Eugenics was very popular in 1900s America and really worldwide. It was closely tied to the popularity of Darwinism at the time.
A number of the early abortionists were actually very, very big on eugenics (most well known being Margaret Sanger--founder of Planned Parenthood--were very much in favor of performing eugenics to wipe out classes of people.
Eugenics, along with a number of related concepts like Social Darwinism, were extremely popular for awhile (at least among the upper classes) until the Holocaust left a bad taste in everyone's mouth and it all fell out of favor.
If you go around certain places (like universities) and pose as the right people and ask the right questions, you can still find a number of eugenicists (primarily on the left in my experience, but considering this is academia there's a bit of a sampling bias). Typically they arrive at population control as an environmental necessity and approach it from that angle (there's just not much need to preserve all those hill billy rednecks, ya'know?)
Eugenics itself is a bad idea because it's basically going to lead to what is effectively genocide.
It is also a direct threat to people and you should be very concerned that such a precedent could be set for you.
I agree
I personally believe abortion should only be offered (not forced) in the case of rape, incest, or health risks.
I put it like this; every person is personified as a flame. Man provides spark, woman provides tinder. If a man lights a flame in a woman's flammables without her consent she should have the right to put it out. And she should be given the ability to snuff a flame lit on damp tinder.
I'm not a religious person. I could see abortion as being a public good. Or maybe just a private one, but available. It meets both supply and demand.
But we got too many people expecting free shit, especially the poor who get pregnant more than those with money.
Then why don't we just try to make people value having sex as something that does after marry?
Educating people the point and purpose of doing it in the first
Not just having funs, but making babies, but doing these could prevent pregnancy , so you can have funs with killing babies
Or you could give babies to people who actually wanted them (sell)
I'm a religious person, so I see abortion as scary things, but I kind of understand why they need it
Lives of children are hopes in the end, so instead of killing them, we should try to give the hopes to someone else who can provide
I think orange man bad <:NPC:500042527231967262>
I think abortion is like pooping <:NPC:500042527231967262>
with blood <:NPC:500042527231967262>
and legs <:NPC:500042527231967262>
and chest <:NPC:500042527231967262>
and then arms <:NPC:500042527231967262>
following by head <:NPC:500042527231967262>
like pooping <:NPC:500042527231967262>
EVERY LOST EGG OR SPERM IS A POTENTIAL LIFE
JAIL FAPPING WEEBS
Well, you want to count that, too, go for it
But I thought those eggs and sperms will br out when there are too many like wet dream and period
And did I say getting people who got abortion to jail?
No. I believe all of people should get to choose what they want to do, but if I can help those babies' lives, I would. But I can't, so there are no points of enforcing the laws to prevent killing babies (well you can someone in your house, so you can also kill someone in your body), but society and media need to work at their best to prevent them from making babies without plans in the first place. And if the babies are made without plans, at least tell the mother that they can sell their babies to other family who can provide, not just "Oh well, let's kill this baby"
>taking shitposts seriously
It's actually happening before your post one shitposts
Then I started it again a bit before your post
Or did you post it before me?
I posted it in response to your shitposts
Oh, you are the same guy
Sorry
I didn't see that you were just joking in here
And No Fap Challenge
Yay
What's the point of the No Fap challenge? Is it just to stop addiction to masturbating?
Basically
Oh.
I mean form my experience, masturbation took a lot from me, and it took me 8 years to realize that
Its a reward for doing nothing much
That makes you lazier
Masturbation is the sexual equivalent of munching on a bag of sugar.
You have isolated the pleasure from the purpose of the pleasure.
Honestly as long as it keeps the libidos down Im fine with it.
Look at Korea's rape statistics after they started censoring porn
I don't support censoring things
I just think that Masturbation is scary
I also just found it
https://youtu.be/G35g5HQVjpU
I think masturbation in a moderate amount is healthy. It allows the person to figure out what turns them on, what they like, how they like things, to learn about their own body. And they are taking part in this self learning with someone whom loves them. So to go along with the munching on sugar analogy. It could be seen more as learning how to bake cookies that you like and then going to someone and offering them to bake cookies with you while showing them how you like your cookies since you already know what kind of cookies you like. . .does that make sense?
I'm afraid not. I feel that it's pretty self evident that reproductive organs are for, well, reproduction. Self-pleasuring isn't a reproductive act, and thus is a misuse of the organs. Pretty straightforward.
Thinking pleasure is the point instead of a side effect is a mistake.
Religion is an essential component of a functioning society.
is religion really essential or is it just a consistently held set of beliefs amongst a population?
Arguing for the necessity of religious ideals in human society would require more energy and refresher research than I'm willing to muster right now.
religion is probably the easiet way to implement that
but at quite the cost
I don't know if I'd say that religion is essential but it's more like humans seem to have a religious need that, if not properly filled, gets filled by whatever is available.
atheism is just the modern religion
To think of it more in terms of food, if a person doesn't eat enough or properly the body will try and sacrifice the lesser needed parts (like fat) to get what it needs to sustain the important parts.
If the body can't get what it needs from storage then it begins to break down other parts, like muscle.
But it's more of filling a hole. So whatever is at hand seems to get plugged.
I's funny, but that's more or less what religious people have been claiming for a while
You choose to believe in something or you believe whatever's available
Probably that phrasing made people think it was just about people being too stupid to "choose for themselves", but it was trying to get at this sort of thing
It makes sense that religious people would claim that. To say something to the effect of, "Everyone needs to eat, we just choose to eat different things." wouldn't be controversial at all.
But in terms of religions the old way of thinking would be, "My diet is the right way and that's that!"
It's amusing because people do exactly that with diets!
So that they'd also do it with other stuff shouldn't really surprise anyone
Also, phrasing it as a diet is interesting, because not every conceivable diet is equally valid or good
Which I guess is kinda Peterson's idea
I think you're absolutely correct, Malt.
34,246 total messages. Viewing 250 per page.
Prev |
Page 70/137
| Next