NotDarkYet
-
Posts
468 -
Joined
-
Days Won
4
Everything posted by NotDarkYet
-
I wished I had been held back a year. I was an early summer baby, so was developmentally 8-10 months behind my friends and was constantly struggling to keep up. Add to that the fact that I was naturally slower to develop - created an inferiority complex which I am still struggling with.
-
Can we correct the title of this thread? Before we promote non-violence, should we not try a different form of violence? -
To be clear, I don't believe this Bearden guy. I'm asking because Anarcho-capitalism was a "crazy" idea to me 10 years ago, and I'm so glad I explored it before I rejected it out of hand. Figured I'd ask smart people what they thought of this Zero Point stuff.
-
If 9/10 people vote for something I find morally wrong, am I forced to pay for it? If you say yes, I don't want you in my life. And please quit pretending this is a 'debate', when you're ok with using force.
-
Then what is this guy all about? What does he get out of pursuing this for 15 + years?
-
I've seen guys on youtube talking about getting Energy from the Vacuum, and Zero Point Energy. Obviously my first instinct is "if this is possible, then a business man would have created and sold a billion of these units - - so this is BS." But this guy, Tom Bearden, gives public presentations on it. He even has technical papers on it: http://www.cheniere.org/techpapers/ Does anybody here have the technical background to debunk (or confirm) any of those "technical papers"?
-
But you can just leave?
NotDarkYet replied to robmcmullan's topic in Libertarianism, Anarchism and Economics
Don't get sucked into consequentialist alleys. A person who says "love it or leave it" still hasn't answered the fundamental contradiction of state violence being OK. -
If everybody gets to interact voluntarily, then we have a market. I don't know why you're going into so much detail. The market will guide those decisions. To wit: Practical Anarchy: http://cdn.media.freedomainradio.com/feed/books/PA/Practical_Anarchy_by_Stefan_Molyneux.mp3
-
Let me ask the question again. Do you, or DONT you want to impose your system on me? If you do, then you agree that some people should initiate violence against others to get what they want. Use all the word salad you want..you can't get around it. And calling this logic "simplistic" isn't an argument.
-
Excellent! Being Irish, I'm sure the UK will be sending me a cheque for Irish-slavery anytime now!
-
I'm not sure the "over-fixation with wealth" is coming from the super-market users....
-
"If an educated public can not even request facts from representatives seeking election...we are far from ready for functioning anarchy." Nope. The exact opposite conclusion is correct. That is an argument for anarchy. If people can't be trusted to control their own body/property, then by definition they can't be trusted with violent control of the bodies and property of others via democracy. Ponder that last sentence. Really really ponder it. Group A: Can (must) use violence. Group B: Must never use violence. You can't base a society on two contradictory rules and expect violence, theft, and evil to decrease. --- Welcome to the boards
-
...to wit: I've lost a ton of money offering my house to my friends in need, as opposed to renting it out. I'm fine with this loss, and have "profited" from the goodwill in many non-cash ways. This is capitalism too.
-
My best friend's wife just told him she wants a divorce. They have 2 very young children (6 and 9). Does anybody have a good source I can give him (to give to her) about the negative effects of divorce on kids?
-
In my experience people who don't WANT to believe in objective morality will go to great lengths to avoid moral certainty, no matter what you throw at them. Finding moral truth would mean actually having to judge their family/friends...and themselves. That's scary. So so so much safer to lock yourself in the ivory tower and throw clouds of mist at waves of abstraction. You get to avoid personal responsibility and as a bonus you get to look smart on the internet. Very very tempting. But these aren't the people who are going to affect change in the world. They are more dead weight we have to pull up the mountain to a liberated humanity.
-
UPB and Truth and Morality are all tied together. A moral judgment implies "ought not do". A logical judgement implies "ought not believe" All of this implies (requires) the acceptance of objectivity.
-
If there are no universal oughts/ought nots, why are you trying to correct a (possible) error in others thinking? You need UPB to (try) to argue against UPB
-
20 cognitive biases that affect decisions
NotDarkYet replied to shirgall's topic in General Messages
It would be cool to see a podcast where Stef gives examples of each of these biases individually to show why people don't question the State. -
Without reference to UPB, any moral judgments are just opinions.
- 17 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- capitalism
- psychopathy
- (and 4 more)
-
Imho, people with family, jobs, children, investments, etc - - don't take up arms. It's a young man's game.
-
I would have studied programming.
-
Perhaps we ought to separate human caused vs natural causes of death. It's not like we'd be OK with a mass murderer if you could show that some avalanche killed MORE people.
-
Discrimination is not only legal, it's mandatory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_class "A protected class is a characteristic of a person which cannot be targeted for discrimination" Straight white males are the only class that you can legally discriminate against.
-
Brilliant comparison. Nature's way of saying "POISON". Interestingly, in my life, the more dyed a girl has dyed her hair, the more militantly feminist (and illogical) she is. I can't think of a single female with violently dyed hair that is a SAFE person to have in your life.