what if their ability to pacify the masses holds up

tbh i think no matter who you guys would get you'd always consider them "another trump" because what you expect is unrealistic and doesnt deliver the results you'd intend

I hate when people say that kind of shit

what that you need to be realistic? im sure you do

you think you know what everyone's thinking

listening to people does give you that ability

holy shit

lmao

mind = blown

its almost like people *say* what they *think*

crono

what am i

thinking of

apparently this
```honestly tucker will probs just end up as another Trump
another person who seems like the man who will save america
but then cucks into the netherrealm
a blue 2020 is inevitable at this point
trump solved nothing
what we need to do is to make sure we get
the deepest blue possible```

wrong

it is

watermelon

its watermelon

oh shit

<:ohno:520006095125872641>

honestly accelerationism in the "lets vote someone in we hate so that people will react to it" is retarded, literally cutting off your nose to spite your face

especially since theres no reason why the pendulum won't swing back as soon as you get your candidate in as people hate your policies just as much

im more along the lines of

speeding up collapse

chaoschaos

again, thats pretty retarded

blowing your house up and killing yourself will also speed up collapse incrementally

why dont you light yourself on fire to rek the libturds?

how is making your country shitter any different?

beyond that its not just yourself who you're affecting and you dont bear the brunt of it, so your kinda just an entitled asshole

i just want something different at this point, too depressed

then do something constructive because wrecking shit and then moping in the corner is a vicious circle because then your gonna want to wreck more shit because you feel weepy that all your shits wrecked

like honestly no hate but this is the logic of a 2 year old on a temper tantrum

Welcome, @deep sea arab! 😃

In my personal view, accelerationism aims at decreasing the peoples' standard of living so bad so that the only way to change the system, revolution, is possible. A problem with this, however, is that due to checks and balances on the president the country will not get to the accelerationist level of instability.

If you get Harambe's dead corpse elected to accelerate things it'll just be controlled by presidential aides and the senate to ensure the country doesn't collapse.

@Kazimir Malevich lets take that at face value, is it a bad thing that a country doesn't collapse overnight? Wouldn't it be considered a good thing that in any country with a bureaucracy there is a floor on how bad things can get while that country remains able to exert itself in order to do so?

in my view revolutions, by which I mean violent insurrections, often create a recurring cycle of poverty in that these movements destroy the infrastructure, institutions and capital that supports the established hierarchy, true, but also supports the wellbeing of the nation as a whole. This causes further unhappiness as the new regime is expected to produce a higher standard with a lower base of productivity to support that. Likely this will result in another revolution, further lowering the standard of living that country can support. This is without examining the effect of development and governance, sovereignty, etc

this is why countries which have engaged in longer periods of reform have performed more strongly then countries which have engaged in revolutionary behaviors.

while im feeling autistic and chat is dead, look at the difference between russia and 'murica. Russia's institutions, industry and infrastructure has been fucked by war, revolution and isolation from trade. Russian gdp is around $us10,000 per capita, the govt is among the most corrupt in the world and putin has very little accountability. Russia does not just have a govt problem, but a lack of infrastructure and industry that is required to support not only the lifestyle of a more wealthy nation but also the systems of accountability, independent research and communication, viable political opposition capable of a smooth transition, the list goes on

america, by contrast, has suffered almost no major periods of domestic destruction on a comparable scale since the civil war and has not only been able to establish all these institutions so that in the event of ineffective leadership they have strong means of not only mitigating the impact, but progressing in spite of poor governance. This continuing prosperity has also afforded it the wealth, reach and stability to ensure that it is insulated from these events occurring, establishing clear means of the peaceful transition of power between political rivals through elections, establishing forward military positions to allow for defense in depth to be applied without threat to the american heartland, private and public thinktanks and media outlets of pretty much every description, all things which a wealth of nearly 60,000 of gdp per capita can not only sustain but advance as threre is a consistent, realistic expectation that wealth will only go up

does america have problems? of course, but its position means it is better placed to solve them and faces issues which are less enduring or catastrophic then those of nations which have experienced periods of substantial domestic duress and destruction, be that by revolution or war or any other cause

People can feel free to address issues as they see fit or not at all, I’m not obligating anyone towards writing a wall of text if there’s something they’d like to contribute though

@CronoSaturn I didn't say it was a problem. I simply said that this is the reason "accelerationist election" doesn't work.

Although I do hope America collapses in the near future.

In what way could that possibly be positive?

>In what way could that possibly be positive?
America collapses.

I don't think I need to state how much of a malicious, money and land-grabbing unimpeded superpower Muttland really is.

Balkanization of the States will be for the country's own good.

I fail to see that the balkanisation of the states is anything near plausible, let alone a good for the us or indeed any other nation

It's fantastic for almost any nation besides Amerika. As for the mutts themselves, the downfall of such a superpower will balance the playing field much better than any of Amerika's "democracy" wars ever did.

As a free-marketer will certainly understand, competition is killed by monopolies.

And if America doesn't have a monopoly on trade, economy, media and culture, I don't know who does.

No-one.

America is highly central, many global transactions involve America to some degree but it is not a monopoly and American companies compete not only with foreign rivals but among themselves

A free marketeer also realised that economics is not a zero sum game and that comparative advantage allows for both parties to benefit from an exchange of trade, culture and ideas

Are there other concerns? Of course. Something I’m grappling with at the moment is the implications of what has recently been introduced to me as geoeconomics (https://youtu.be/lswiu1K1Vnk is an exceptionally good exploration of the concepts being introduced) that seeks to justify mercantile thought while accepting the validity of liberal economic arguments. It sees the strategic influence of supply chains as a risk not captured in conventional economic discourse and that it allows influence in decision making to advance the achievement of a set of goals. In the past we’ve also discussed my apprehension towards the increased capacity for war that a higher level of economic activity would provide to poor global actors

On the other hand I realise however that restricting this activity only serves to cement the established regimes influence on these poor actors as the domestic population is less equipped to maintain the proper function of apparatus I outlined earlier as they simply don’t have the means of doing so. There is then a tension in US decision making in the normal economic arguments and the desire to combat abhorrent regimes at their core by providing a means of mutual wealth by which such constructs can be developed to reduce the influence of these regimes and the requirement to keep such nations with these regimes at the helm in check

I’m unsure as to what the best course is to achieve these seemingly contrasting aims but I am becoming increasingly convinced that relying on these regimes to starve themselves out is ineffective both in success and failure.

To play the otherside, I think it’s massively important to realise the role America plays in global stability, development and prosperity. We’re having this discussion on discord, a primarily American platform using primarily American designed hardware bankrolled by American institutions. It is unrealistic to expect that in America’s absence that the same capability would spring up and then some because the demand far exceeds the supply already but other nations simply lack the same capacity to supply a global centre of excellence on par with Silicon Valley as of now. In order to even consider standing that kind of thing up it’s difficult to see where the amount of materials, expertise, planning etc might come from except from the land of excess and exception that is the United States

It’s counterproductive then to seek a level playing field by tearing down the leader where that wealth could be leveraged to mutually beneficial ends to ensure your own prosperity

Most people can live without Discord. Hundreds of thousands of people stop living because of America's influence and meddling.
Tearing down the leader is beneficial (unlike in the Middle East, which Amerika doesn't realize) because (unlike the Middle East) the power vacuum would be filled equally by several other countries.
It is productive specifically because a sole superpower causes stagnation.

I don’t think that’s what we’ve seen nor as you seem to acknowledge for middle eastern countries but ignore in the case of America would the vacuum be likely filled without conflict

Global prosperity is rising, technological growth has increased year on year, people are lifted out of crippling poverty at historically unprecedented rates not because of America’s charity, but by its excess

Nor is America alone in meddling, China, Russia and European powers certainly feel no remorse interfering even violently in the affairs of other nations when it suits them and American leadership has done much to keep large scale conflict at bay and keep things at a very limited scale

The russian military has not shown for example the same restraint as American forces in Georgia, Chechnya or the Ukraine

China similarly has shown itself unable to distinguish or even create a distinction between civil groups and threats in Tibet or during current counter insurgency ops to support its belt and road initiative

Both the administration of xi jinping and putin have demonstrated an aggressive posture and in the case of putin we have a demonstrated history of expansionist actions. What makes you think @Kazimir Malevich that the absence of American power would turn these tigers into cats?

Do you not think this would rather entice their ambitions?

It's less of "I think Putin and Xi Jinping will be pacifists when America is gone" and more of "A world oligopoly is still better than a monopoly".

Given America is not the only country it is not a monopoly now and ww1, ww2 had a number of powerful actors

I’m curious as to how you think that translates to better outcomes

It's a false equivalency, as of now, due to both the increased trade and nuclear weapons the "world wars" are proxy wars. It's not going to get better or worse, but will fare better for 2nd and 3rd world countries in the long run.

I would prefer if Ruffia was finally defeated and then fractured into several smaller countries Thx but no thx!

This but for America. You see, us Russians have based and redpilled views on balkanization!

So rather than unlimited, wars of attrition your quibble is that we see limited wars of mobility and you see this as a bad thing? In absolute terms we live in one of the most peaceful times in history as a bushwar in some tplac simply doesn’t have the same capacity to wreck devastation on the scale of a global conflict. This also ignores that modern thought regarding 4th generational warfare makes little distinction between hard and soft power, meaning such “conflict” is often seen as development of infrastructure, cultural exchanges, technological upskilling, etc. hardly a poor outcome for the developing world

I don't see this as a bad thing. I see this as one more argument for balkanization of America. If the remaining, good countries won't go to WW3 because of Amerika's ruination, all the better.

That’s unlikely to be the outcome, however

In the absence of a dominant hard power there would be little necessity to apply soft power rather than hard

Cold War did that fine when there were two equal superpowers.

Less so then the current period but the absence of America would not result in the immediate creation of a plurality of superpowers in its wake as no nation as of now has the capacity to project power on a level equivalent to the ussr or they would already be doing so.
This comparison also fails in that I don’t think the potential candidates to fill that position would have the stability or interest in being seen as humane to the degree of the ussr, which I think the history speaks to how low that bar is. Nor would any actor have the same capacity and interest as the US to compel other actors to do so which again, not a high bar

It’s like saying if we burn mcscrooges mansion down and hang him from a tree then we’ll all get mansions

It's more like saying if we burn down Walmart, the local greenery stores would sell more celery to their customers.

As for the USSR, we're talking about the Cold War, post-Thaw period.

I realise that but you addressed the Cold War, I addressed the flaws in that position.
We’re also not talking about celery, kaz. We’re talking force of arms. We don’t want more sales from any actor

No, we are talking about trade and culture, the very reason for which Amerika supposedly shouldn't be balkanized.

So let’s talk trade and culture. Rolling with the Walmart analogy for culture neither America nor Walmart got to where they were because people didn’t find utility in it. If it’s not to your taste though it’s not like there’s any shortage of alternatives. Last time I checked the Bolshoi and Hermitage havnt been suffering from american patronage.

The alternative still holds up. Walmart has food that is trash, but the alternative variant is a) more expensive, and b) repressed because of lack of economies of scale, can't accumulate wealth and profit at the same rate as Walmart. If Walmart is to burn, the alternatives would be the next immmediate option.
Last time I checked, turning on the TV and looking at half-dressed harlots is cheaper than going to Bolshoi.

The public will turn to the cheapest option, so it is necessary at least for culture to turn the most preferrable option into the cheapest.

It’s hard to argue alternatives are suppressed where the market for theatre, books etc is only reaching new heights. I’m also not sure if we want people seeing high culture as their porn alternative and flogging one off to the Venus de milo. Plus I don’t know about where you are kaz but it’s pretty easy to get into an art show or amateur show for nothing and I don’t know how much more competitive you can get then free. Continuing to use the ballet as an example the line half dressed harlots and high culture is pretty blurred and certainly ballerinas have seen value in having a hand in each industry

Accelerationism isn’t about making the system worse. It’s about engaging the system into overdrive thus making it collapse.

That’s like saying adding a healthy mix of salt water and turpentine to the fuel in your engine isn’t about making your engine worse, it’s about pushing its tolerance limits until it breaks

Do I really have to explain to the nationalist server why a non-functioning nation is worse then a functional one?

There is supposed to be a better-functioning society after the revolution happens in an over-drived system. I'm not supporting it, but it's a bit more sophisticated than "lol i want no society".

lol i want no society

@CronoSaturn I don’t think you understand etymologies

@Kazimir Malevich I’m not sure how this is any more sophisticated then the delusional thinking of those that self harm expecting if they only hit rock bottom then they’ll magically turn their life around.

The word "revolution" comes from the word "revolve" for a reason.

turning things around.

So does revolt. Does that mean this train of thought is disgusting?

@CronoSaturn well bloody revolution is gonna happen to either way man like it or not

I’m exceptionally curious as to what basis you come by that assertion

Reality

Chad "reality" vs virgin "facts"

I mean it’s safe to say the majority of people aren’t really feeling good about capitalism and the current system

Capitalism is rad dude

Poor people in a capitalist country will be WAY more poor in any sort of disgusting commie one

This tbh

Broooo wtf is this

https://youtu.be/sl2--OHvxK4

How the fuck did this even happen

Like what the fuck

Oh, delightful.

He has a great voice.

Lauren is hot

But for someone who is 23 she looks like someone old enough to be my mom

Honestly

@im in the middle of nowhere bruh it really isn’t. Stats vary depending on source and how the position is presented however it’s difficult to justify that the “mildly displeased” that the more pessimistic results present, even if this was united under a common front, would be able to garner the support or feeling necessary for any revolutionary action. This is again without any regard for the feasibility of any such action and relying on absolutely no solutions being presented by forthcoming administrations

Dude only westerners like capitalism

You’re kidding yourself

Oddly enough the United States is a western country populated by western people

I’m unsure how you feel this supports your argument

Welcome @queenis!

A little bit of both I think. I think we are born with a certain personality that makes us different, but we obviously grow and change as people.

Interesting question.

It’s both. We are born with a DNA that gives us some part of our personality, but we also learn from experiences.

I'd agree with that.

Yeah hey guys

Howdy @Andreas der Deutsche @SirGarretOfAA @SultanPistachios . Welcome to the Nationalist Union. If you want ranks go to <#507040923884978176> and use ?ranks to see all available ranks and use ?rank enterrankname so that you can join one be sure to check out our <#507040801860091914> and <#521916756852342784>

Also what a retarded debate topic, our experiences change our visions of the world

Do a prostitute(the one who has to sell her body to survive) was born to be a prostitute?

@𝕿𝖔𝖙𝖆𝖑𝖎𝖙𝖆𝖗𝖎𝖆𝖓 𝕲𝖗𝖆𝖓𝖉𝖆𝖉𝖉𝖉𝖞 Thank you. I'll see how I can help myself out here.

i wanna do a partneship

A little bit of both, but mostly genetics. Twins often have very similar personalities and beliefs, for example.

@CronoSaturn intresting topic I'd say this is a one answer question. Our nature and paths of thinking are made at birth, but the brain evolves all the time and as a person you'll always grow and evolve your mind.

Most people seem to be saying that you are born into yourself and then shaped further by your experiences. Some things to consider here, at which point, if any, do those differences become sufficient to say you are a different person to who you were born as?

As time progresses we also see an increased capacity to alter our DNA. Does doing so make us different people? Or when chosen is it merely the manifestation of the person we have become?

I don't think we ever will be able to change our DNA. That seems extremly advance probeply impossile.

We also share a great deal of genetic material and experiences as common, should this common heritage be considered part of us as individuals, or as part of the human condition?

🤔

Have a look at CRISPR as a technology. How it will mature is yet to be seen but certainly there are those in the field who believe that it may have that capacity and are exploring developing that capability

China has been in hot water with the ethics committees of a number of scientific boards for using the technology to alter the germ line of both adults and human foetuses

"Some things to consider here, at which point, if any, do those differences become sufficient to say you are a different person to who you were born as?" Sounds very metaphysical... the terms me and you have little meaning outside of human experience so it is hard to say when one person becomes a different one because you don't know what constitutes you in the first place.

Is there any place for "me" in the everchaning world?

I will get back to it on this tipic surely!! Gotta go now tho!

Whether we “know” in a hard sense does not preclude a discussion where we evaluate the merits and flaws with how we understand these questions however.

I think your second question is an interesting one. How important is the self in society? To what extent should it be protected or be forced to conform?

Ill look forward to hearing your views when you have the chance

@CronoSaturn we grow.

@Aki sup

I mean sure we can say that when I was an embryo, I was still me and from that moment till now it's been me all along, all the same person, but that person has been growing obviously

It's a philosophical thing I suppose it's a matter of opinion

Well to varying degrees, of course its very difficult to pin down a single view as the question is deliberately vague and so without knowing exactly how people define their terms, their reasoning etc but we can try and discuss these to try and understand the positions of others and ourselves to a greater degree
Plus fuck it, I find it fun to talk about

https://spectator.us/womens-sports-consist-men/

Re you as an embryo progressing to you as you are now though @snakeeater, obviously you share very little in common with yourself as an embryo. Obviously you are a lot bigger then you were then, you can understand language, etc. If someone were to hire you and had a foetus delivered to them instead obviously that wouldnt be what they wanted. In what way is it accurate then to say that you are the same thing?

@CronoSaturn It however can influence where this discussion goes and establishing this basic principle gives the discussion meaning that it otherwise lacks... but addressing your second question... the way I see it society ought to be built on human nature... so self should be protected as long as its individual interests are not aimed at undermining this order... and self should also be actively encouraged to strenghten the order. When it comes to CRISPR... I think its usage should be limited only to strictly medical purposes and nothing more. I hope it is vague enough because in reality I think it would be more productive to talk about specific examples instead of trying to establish general rules that will surely have to fail when confronted with practical examples
@snakeeater Hi hi
Hmm... but what in this embryo constitutes you? Atoms in the human body, for example, are totally replaced with new ones every several years due to metabolic processes.

@CronoSaturn @Aki because that embryo and I have the same genes

The only difference between us is time and experiences

Genetic engineering seems outside the scope of this conversation

This is so much more interesting to me than politics. Fuck politics

@Aki so what’s natural here? Humans are not alone in the fact that we use tools to manipulate the world to better suit our needs. I would hardly think anyone would call a beaver dam “unnatural”, why do we make a distinction when a dam is made by humans?
Same same with what we should consider a medical procedure. What’s the distinction here?

@snakeeater we wouldn’t say identical twins are the same person, is genetics then what makes you the same person? As I touched on earlier, you also have massive differences physically, in terms of capability, even in terms of agency. How can we say then that you are the same thing?

I said time and experience @CronoSaturn

Sure so a foetus has had no time or experience that we share to any real degree, I don’t remember being a foetus for example.

Could we not think of this like a caterpillar and a butterfly? obviously one requires the other, they are of the same species, but they are not the same thing

@CronoSaturn I originally said that my answer to the question was We Grow I just clarified that in a certain way the fetus and all of the stages of Life are the same organism growing so it's sort of a yes and no answer

A caterpillar and the butterfly it becomes are both the same organism in different stages of life

The same would apply for the stages of human life like embryo childhood teenage years excetera

Sure I can see that.

If y’all aren’t walking around the house straight *strapped* the fuck you doing

like why wouldn’t you keep an 870 on every floor of your house

Im always strapped with an emergency snickers bar in case i get the munchies

Howdy @sammie . Welcome to the Nationalist Union. If you want ranks go to <#507040923884978176> and use ?ranks to see all available ranks and use ?rank enterrankname so that you can join one be sure to check out our <#507040801860091914> and <#521916756852342784>

hello

can i get roles?

Libertarian, right wing and alt right

Howdy @Phillip. Welcome to the Nationalist Union. If you want ranks go to <#507040923884978176> and use ?ranks to see all available ranks and use ?rank enterrankname so that you can join one be sure to check out our <#507040801860091914> and <#521916756852342784>

any real niggas here

Howdy @CornDog . Welcome to the Nationalist Union. If you want ranks go to <#507040923884978176> and use ?ranks to see all available ranks and use ?rank enterrankname so that you can join one be sure to check out our <#507040801860091914> and <#521916756852342784>

epiuc

LetThereBeWhite:
https://twitter.com/RationalMale/status/1103453996054806528

Big Oof

Howdy @Venasius. Welcome to the Nationalist Union. If you want ranks go to <#507040923884978176> and use ?ranks to see all available ranks and use ?rank enterrankname so that you can join one be sure to check out our <#507040801860091914> and <#521916756852342784>

@CornDog epic avatar

On my new account now

Who’s voting for Hillary

no one

Me

just kidding

https://images-ext-1.discordapp.net/external/1XB_tPT17PE_V8bHJNHAZyDTVK9428UOV9XAWGECMe0/https/timedotcom.files.wordpress.com/2016/12/dylann-roof1.jpg?width=924&height=677

nice

@CronoSaturn Well.. in the context of this discussion, I am particularly interested in natural human psychology... and evolutionary psychology deals with the issue so it can be quite well defined.
Well... by that I mean diseases like Parkinson, Altzheimer, allergies etc. So in other words a disease as understood by an average normie.

what would you say if i said this would you believe me

monarchs protect you democracies exploit you

would you believe me

Correct

God save the Czar

i have an entire reason why im a nationalist monarchist so much i won't waste my time typing it

which is why im in debate voice chat

Well I would agree with you so you’ll have to find another dude

best of all tho

stability

@Aki Right but evolution is dynamic and so evolutionary psychology is descriptive not predictive. Our environment is no longer the savanna but increasingly engineered and so expecting the same psychology to serve each would be strange. Evolutionary psychology also doesn’t deal with individual well being, only the long term statistical success of differing strategies. Rape here would be considered a high risk but valid strategy, as would cuckoldry and infanticide. Typically Parkinson’s, altzheimer’s, allergies etc is not understood in evolutionary terms but through the principle of harm. This is why we consider sickle cell anaemia a disease despite its ability to sustain populations more sustainably in malaria prone areas. None of this, however is psychology

lol how is cuckoldry a strategy

Game theory is typically the mathematical frame used to analyse actions in not only evolution but in pretty much any value optimising scenario with other actors. In that frame a strategy is defined as a set of actions which are based not only on that actors decisions but also the decisions of others. If you can cuck someone and they decide to raise your kid for whatever reason, you receive an evolutionary payoff in that you have passed on your genes, the child is cared for and you have no outlay to support that, allowing you to devote them to passing on your genes, getting further payoffs

@CronoSaturn Well... if you think that the environment we live in doesn't suit our nature, then maybe there is something wrong with the environment that needs correction... no? ~ Evolutionary psychology doesn't deal with the individual well being but it deals with the psychological roots of morality, for example and measures the current state of the human condition... and that alone should be enough to establish a set of principles.

The principle of harm is not a very good way to define a disease because it allows a huge leeway... but I don't think there is a good way to define it so that is why I said "as understood by a normie". Regardless... this line of conversation is not really related to the first paragraph.

@CronoSaturn oh, sure cucking somebody is a strategy, but when you said cuckoldry I was thinking of the cuck, who doesn't have a strategy here lol

@snakeeater depends. Some tournament mating systems see pretty stable systems of cuckoldry emerge as the cucker draws in more females, giving the cuckee higher access then they would otherwise have. This would be less common in humans as we *tend* not to operate at those kinds of scales but it would still be valid, even knowing your being cucked, where the higher access to females overcomes the increased outlay.
if the cukee was unaware its a case of asymmetric information in which case it makes sense to take no action where the risk of acting poorly is higher then the risk of outlaying resources innapropriately

@Aki the mistake your making here is that evolution has a set standard of what is our "nature". The fact that evolution deals with the emergence of new species should put this thought in the ground. This means that in cases where the environment changes the basis for an established standard is shifted. It would also be very difficult to use this as a system of moral judgement because the sole basis of judgement would be whether its practitioners reproduce. For example the elderly killing themselves as soon as they are unable to reproduce or conduct productive work would be considered highly moral as from an evolutionary perspective they can no longer contribute and are simply consuming resources

@CronoSaturn
_"the mistake your making here is that evolution has a set standard of what is our "nature". The fact that evolution deals with the emergence of new species should put this thought in the ground. This means that in cases where the environment changes the basis for an established standard is shifted."_

The dynamism of the process is not an issue as far as humans are concerned. We can control our environment and in a given timeframe there exists a given standard of "nature" (including this timeframe). So... why would it be a problem Crono?

_"It would also be very difficult to use this as a system of moral judgement because the sole basis of judgement would be whether its practitioners reproduce. For example the elderly killing themselves as soon as they are unable to reproduce or conduct productive work would be considered highly moral as from an evolutionary perspective they can no longer contribute and are simply consuming resources"_

It isn't an issue tho... There exists a certain standard of our "nature" and this standard can be measured. Why do you see it as an issue Crono? Maybe because it doesn't go along well with your liberal morality based on feels? Maybe because deep inside you know that it is quickly becoming redundant?

@Aki the problem is that the current standard of the environment or nature has an exceptionally low amount of data to ascertain from an evolutionary standpoint what the optimised behavioural set might be and is changing at such a pace that it would be unlikely that we would at any point reach a time where enough data can be gathered in such a span so that conclusions would not only be valid retrospectively.

Also you realise I’m a transhumanist aki? I think theres a moral requirement for us to pursue ends that would make humanism completely invalid

I exaggerate, completely is a stretch but you get the meme

@CronoSaturn
_"The problem is that the current standard of the environment or nature has an exceptionally low amount of data to ascertain from an evolutionary standpoint what the optimised behavioural set might be and is changing at such a pace that it would be unlikely that we would at any point reach a time where enough data can be gathered in such a span so that conclusions would not only be valid retrospectively. "_

I am not sure why do you keep making this misrepresentating of my position. As we currently are evolution does not advance as fast as science does... (as a matter of fact, it seems to be going in a direction that is not compatible). My position is that large parts of our moral compass are based on natural instincts encoded in our genes and that the tools of evolutionary psychology can be used to measure it... as such what is optimal in our current environment is not an issue I am concerned with... at least from this standpoint.

_"Also you realise I’m a transhumanist aki?"_

That is a very shortsighted position, but fitting a librul that you are! :p

_"I think theres a moral requirement for us to pursue ends that would make humanism completely invalid"_

There is no such thing. You can only hold such a position because you have somehow managed to detach your moral code from the material world despite being an atheist. In the transhumansit world, there is no place for any sort of morality my dear Crono... it can just be engineered on a whim.. as the engineer intends to.

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/israel-india-pakistan-conflict-balakot-arms-trade-jaish-e-mohammed-a8800076.html

They have their hands in everything it seems

hello

Begone from me

White devil

lol

Stinkin cave beast

Das right

im not cave beast

wtf?

you casting some spells i did not understand single word of what you wrote

Are you black, Mexican, Japanese or normal?

is short for normal

i dont even understand your question

What race are you?

You do realize that Japanese and Mexicans arent race hahahahaha

Oh what great wisdom bigbrained one, I can tell you’ve watched a lot of Rick & Morty

Nah you just stupid

its common knowledge