Leaderboard

Virtue is a quality of person who acts in a way which manifests the values that he holds. Virtuous action is those moral actions (those that dont violate NAP) that acheive a specific value. Values are entirely subjective. What's meant by "Love is an involuntary response to virtue if I am myself virtuos" in my opinion, is: "Love is an involuntary response to the actions in others that manifest the values that I value, when I myself act to manifest the values that I value, if those actions are moral."

Oh, and... He is already here. *dramatic chipmunk music*

Sorry but that is just stupid. Having a child is not an initiation of force such as its comparable to knocking someone out. If it is then just throw the whole concept of NAP out, its useless as an idea.

This is a good point. There have been plenty of things I've been exposed to, because of the suggested video catagory. However, shadow banning has become more of a thing also. Google's take over of YouTube has been a gradual slide to censorship. Im personally getting tired on online activism though, and just want to form groups. Been in the game for 9-8yrs now. Many of the things I warned about have come true, but I'm not exactly the beaming charismatic leader lol. So trying to find a mod of exposure for me is getting increasingly difficult. Just to note. If you aren't getting flake? You're not over the target. The closer you are the faster they hit you.

The reasons that people usually "deny" catastrophic global warming are specific to that topic. There are real concerns about the science. Many climate sceptics are former environmentalists who actually looked at the science and were shocked at what they saw, Anthony Watts of wattsupwiththat.com being one example. Many supporters of climate change alarm are science groupies who don't actually look at the science themselves. Personally, the argument I find most compelling is: if the evidence for catastrophic CO2-induced climate change is overwhelming, why don't they just present a concise summary of that evidence? Instead over the years we've had a string of weak papers to try to convince the public that recent warming is something unusual, such as MBH 1998 (inappropriate statistical technique that creates hockey sticks, selective use of time series that happen to be hockey-stick-shaped) and Gergis et al (withdrawn just hours before they would have been independently found out for not having detrended their data as they claimed to have). Regarding other forms of pollution, one of the problems with climate change campaigning is that it diverts vast resources away from addressing real pollution problems. The climate change movement doesn't actually care very much about the environment (they don't mind if their policies such as biofuel mandates damage the environment), just as socialists don't care very much about the poor (they don't mind if their policies keep the poor that way).

Doom Paul is so 2012.

Hi Coleman. I've had some friends do the Landmark Forum who say that it's improved their lives immensely, but I'm torn about it for the following reasons. Firstly, what I've heard from my friends and what I've read suggests that it's about enforcing personal responsibility, stopping your history from determining your future, and not projecting your past onto your relationships. All of that sounds damn good. In fact, it sounds like the call-ins to Stef about relationship or self-knowledge questions. Back when I first started listening to FDR Stef would go in in deep with these callers for an hour or more. Stef's approach is to question the caller thoroughly about their question, situation, personal history and childhood, draw parallels between the past and the decisions the caller is making today, and discuss how to overcome those patterns of behavior. Importantly, Stef insists on absolute personal responsibility and honesty. He unhesitatingly calls out lies, contradictions, evasions, minimizations, and any attempt to avoid answering questions. Through this, the caller comes to realizations they may not have otherwise. The Forum's method includes something of this, so that appeals to me. On the other hand, Stef counters the caller's resistance with reason and evidence (usually by pointing out something the caller said but then tried to gloss over). Some reading I've done suggests that when Forum participants make excuses, and especially if they criticize Landmark's methods, they are met with abuse, mockery, and public shaming in front of a group that has been primed to police your and each other's behavior. Less correcting factual errors via logic and more silencing dissent via emotion. The other reason I don't like the Forum is also the reason I didn't join; the ferocious, manipulative, borderline-abusive hard-sell. I attended a home introduction to Landmark, and went through one of these for two hours, and it was miserable. I almost caved but thankfully another friend who was there (and didn't sign up) gave me the social backing I needed to refuse. My memory of that event has kept me away ever since. On top of that, my reading suggests you get called on throughout the Forum to sign up for the advanced course, and are required to bring a friend or family member to the "graduation ceremony". There, your guest is surrounded by Landmark sales reps and pressured to sign up for the Forum. This is exactly what happened when my sister attended the graduation of a Forum-going friend. I don't want that again; not for me, sure as hell not for anyone I care about. So that's a big and enduring turn-off. And just to put the cherry on it, the friends who did the course seem to have cut me off, and I think it's because of my persistent refusal to follow them. Here are the sources I've been referring to. Have a look and see what you think. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/karin-badt/inside-the-landmark-forum_b_90028.html https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2003/dec/14/ameliahill.theobserver http://www.xojane.com/newagey/landmark-forum-cult http://www.gq.com/story/landmark-forum-get-confident-stupid-gq-may-2005 http://www.philosophyforlife.org/category/landmark-forum/ http://www.mypracticalphilosophy.com/shelp/landmarkforum.htm EDIT: Mentioned the personal experience of Landmark's hard-sell to one of my siblings.

Why are you asking internet people what you should do with your life and whom you should date?

Multiple podcasts several hour longs dictate otherwise but nice chatting. Also, plagiarizing his "not an argument" doesn't make you an intellectual. Thanks for coming.

Stefan, I have some questions about your climate change skepticism. But firstly I have to say that I agree with you that bigger government isn't going to solve the problem, if there is one. I'm wondering if you deny desertification, carcinogenic smog, hypoxic dead zones in the ocean, ocean acidification, record breaking droughts and wild fires, etc. From my understanding of biology I recognize that humans, and most organisms on earth (except for the little bastards living off the chemicals spewing from sea floor vents) require the functioning of various environmental conditions which are very specific. Take for example phyto plankton, these little guys require a specific ph for their habitat. These humble creatures are the source of about 50% of our atmospheric oxygen. Our activities of heavily polluting the atmosphere and by leaving so much shit to run off into the oceans, we've begun to fiddle too much with the oceans conditions. Or lets take carcinogenic smog. It's likely that you've seen 'made in china' hundreds of times in your life. Chinas air pollution is horrific, I'm sure you've seen the photos. I say we don't need government to solve these problems, in fact, they make these problems considerably worse. What we need is personal responsibility for our economic demand, awareness of the effects of our purchases. Since I was born, something like 40% of species have gone extinct. I recognize that humanity is creating a new geological epoch on this small planet, we have megalopolises outstretched across our continents, and 40% of the earths land mass is now farmland. I know that in an ecosystem, all organisms are connected to each other. The earth is mostly a closed system and we're disrupting the fragile conditions our species relies on for survival. And I don't mean the people who can have their food grown and synthesized in labs. Regardless of your position on global warming/climate change, do you understand the effects of environmental pollution and degradation on other people and sentient organisms? Thanks for reading, I'm interested in your thoughts on this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJUA4cm0Rck