Leaderboard

When you run into contrary opinions, narratives, or experiences, be curious. When your curiosity is satisfied or there are no more arguments to be evaluated there's no need to continue.

''Yuri Bezmenov, ex-KGB agent, straight up said that once demoralization is complete these people will stare right at the truth and still refuse to change their position.'' Are we seeing this effect of demoralization from the left? How much of their disconnect from reality does it account for? How feasible is their healing? What portion of them should we not spend resources on to heal?

Wait. Relativism or Christianity? You do know Stefan wrote a book called Universally Preferable Behavior: A Rational Proof of Secular Ethics? And also one titled Against the Gods which is a short and sweet refutation of arguments for god? You understand UPB is the framework he has hung FDR on? He's not a Christian. And you folk who think he's just in the closet or something are actually projecting yourselves onto him. The truth is you really don't believe the Christian bull crap, and your inner rational being is trying to get out. If you think there is an end to this journey called life other than death, you're on the wrong boat. There can can be no greater relativism in morality than "because god said so."

global warming as it exists today has become a RELIGION, as such you cannot rationally discuss it and it requires no "proof"; nor can you disprove it with observations. starting in the 70's when some finance savvy scientists discovered that they can get a lot of funding by creating the perception of doom this has been moving nicely along gaining "converts". This is nothing new and is in fact right in-line with the great "doom prophesiers" that have exploited the masses (or the wealthy) throughout human history! sadly only logical thinking can stop it, and the government has pretty much trashed the education system. It would only take the mass media about 1 day to go visit ALL the environmental doom prophesies that said by now we would all be dead to see that such predictions are, well, useless...andddddd it will never happen.

I saw a little bit of the gamergate episode. I thought it was great. Then I realized it wasn't satire.

Regarding appropriateness: One thing that is really hard for people who heavily rely on using reason, discussion, and negotiation, is using any of these things on someone who is incapable of them. I've known this for a long time but it really, really hit me at the Milo event in UW when I did my damnedest to get any Antifa idiot to talk to me ("But tell me why I'm a fascist!"), and I was simply rewarded with blows and paint on my head. You literally cannot reason with some people. Unfortunately, there are people who can fake reason. These are known as sophists. Whether they are really good at undermining your argument, or just not shutting the fuck up so no other information can get through, they will often appear to be reasonable to others watching. Trolling then is an effective method for frustrating them and sabotaging their efforts, allowing you to get more wholesome information out. The goal is to shut them up, waste their energy, or get them on something unimportant, in the same way they set out to waste your energy by pretending to be reasonable. Regarding being a jerk: The initiator who pretends reason is the jerk. When you troll, you will appear as a jerk to people who can't reason, and a savior to people who can. Focus on impressing the important of the two groups. I noticed this when Stef had a call-in show a few months back with a guy, I think named Fritz. Fritz was an annoying sophist and Stef literally spent 40 patient minutes with him. I could tell within 30 seconds Fritz was a jerk, and after 40 minutes when Stef finally lost his patience, he received a HUGE amount of feedback that HE was the jerk. Stef actually had to do another call-in show to explain exactly what happened and why Fritz was the jerk and not him. I noticed it right off the bat, and was actually frustrated with how patient Stef was. If you identify sophistry, don't worry about being a jerk. How to know when you're going to far: When you're trolling people who are being reasonable to begin with? When you can't stop trolling? Hope that helps.

I believe the concept of 'worth' can only apply to a being which is conceptually aware and therefore can conceptually value. I believe it must be aware of something of value to it and aware that it is aware that something is of value to it. Any animal I can think of is only the former never the latter (except humans.) Fundamentally, animals are not aware of their own existence and only perceptually aware of stimuli they operate on (like a computer.) Therefore that can't 'value' their own lives (or anything else) because they don't conceive of their own lives (which makes any action against them technically moral.) What an animal is worth to you is subjective, and though it may have value to you or me, objectively I believe it's worthless. Though anyone comfortable abusing animals is obviously showing signs of psychopathology. If there were an 'advanced' sentient machine or being with conceptual awareness, like us, it would be able to value it's own life as we do and therefore it's life 'worth' would be equally valid to our own. Please let me know if I didn't explain this clearly enough (I have trouble with that)and let me know what you think!

Ah the pompousness argument. We humans are so great at the brainy stuff, like knowing we exist, that any other animal can't possibly have any such intelligent abilities. I know this is sort of the general view amongst people, but this forum is a bit more challenging environment to propose such conclusions. I'm sure there are at least 10 ways to make your statement collapse. But I am wondering if you thought enough about it before you typed. Remember that humans scientifically fall under the classification of animals. Not that it hardly matters since 'animals' has become so universally meaning "non human". It would of course be much more productive to stop putting every non human living thing in one box. You appear to be setting a standard for an ability that may already be present in many animals here on earth.

I tried reporting you for being borderline divine with your arguments, but apparently that's not a thing. I could however report you for being passive-aggressive. I have written in twice already to Mike, but did not get a chance. Once in December, and once this week. I was intening to bring up UBP too, however that was not my main focus. There seems to be a good reason for you to be so hostile, and I would guess it has something to do with your parents (usually the case). I hereby offer you again the opportunity to conduct a civil discussion with me. Will you behave in a universally preferable manner, or will you not?