Josh F

Why aren't you critical of his philosophy? How else do you know if it is true?

Structural Violence: I was forced to attend a high school, under threat of violence, which required me to read the Communist Manifesto and study gender and racial theories from a strictly socialist view point. That is structural violence, the way children are conscripted and forced into this kind of indoctrination. The structure is called government, and the violence starts when we're children.

What does exploit mean? I never get it, I hear lots of socialists use it with out ever providing a definition. Is it exploitation when I go back for second free samples.at the supermarket? Is exploitation what happens when you try and get a discount? Is it exploitation to wait for your boss to be in a good mood before you ask for a raise? Am I exploiting people when I hire them to do jobs I dont want to do myself? Did I exploit my parents for all that free food they gave me as a child? Unless it involves FRAUD, THEFT, or any other type of FORCE it doesn't really matter. Exploitation without force is a failure of the individual to assert their boundaries or defend themselves from abusive personalities. This is best addressed with therapy, not government.

When it comes to men paying for women's healthcare, lets remember, there is no argument being made, only force. "We have to pass it to see what inside." There was never a debate, no good point in having one now. It wasn't like this was foisted upon us by a populist movement of passionate socialists. It was forced on the American people by a secretive and powerful government.

Once someone becomes abusive, and I'm no expert here, I find that informing them of their abuse gives them an opportunity to continue the debate by apologizing and changing their tone. This is not something you owe them, but if it is the right context in the right location you're free to do so. However, when they refuse to change their tone, you need to move on. They may persist, but it is a matter of self-respect now if you continue to engage abusive people. You don't owe them enlightenment or truth or even a second of your time. We're in dire circumstances. The government is literally killing people and robbing them as we speak, there is no time to waste trying to heal fatal humans. This is triage. I think the above conversation is a very insightful, revealing the motives of the so called neutral debater, and their underlining abusive intentions. I might have made the mistake of not cutting it off soon enough, but in the context of this forum and topic it seemed worth at least one last attempt at taking it beyond its intellectual mask. In general, complete waste of time though, except in so far as it proved my thesis.

Damn, I am deFOOing at 27, this kid is a fucking super hero holy shit. This video is hard to watch, but man, it helped me see a lot of the bullshit in my own life. What a fucking CHAMP!

I would like to keep this thread going guys, if you have any personal stories of empathy having positive results in online conversations please share!

You called abusive behavior heroic. Are you fat or do you struggle with your weight? As someone who was obese as a child let me make this clear for you so you can proceed with some real information: WE KNOW WE ARE FAT. It isn't a mystery. Our parents called us fat. Other kids called us fat. Teachers, strangers, your friends parents, they all call you fat. The majority of eating issues come from two places: 1. being insulted or humiliated routinely, and 2. sexual molestation. Please, proceed with empathy, you've now been informed that you're advocating the problem not the solution.

Can you describe how you've attempted making fiends in the past? Do you think you've been a friend to someone, but they haven't been one to you? Have you read any of Stef's work on RTR?

Nostalgia, for me personally, is glorifying bad memories. Like the 60's and early 70's is my favorite examples. There are these cut together clips of hippies, and Vietnam vets and civil rights with some classic rock and everyone is like awww the good times. I mean I've seen my dad get misty eyes over that kind of crap. But o course Vietnam, the way black people were being treated, the weird cults and drug abuse aren't good things at all. Ever see those lists on facebook. Goes like this "I was a kid of the 80s. We didnt all have cellphones. Sometimes our parents hit us. We played rough outside and scraped our knees. Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. Wasn't it great?" Not "Race riots, gangster rap, discontented youth, cocaine wall-street parties, gender confusion, etc"

I am frankly shocked these videos aren't more popular and haven't working their way into politics even more because they're VERY effective forms of propaganda.

The same, they're considered synonyms. Ethics might be what you'd call the field of philosophy. So like Metaphysics is about what is reality, and metaphysical means reality they're more or less synonyms. I would say there is no important distinction, and I do remember Stef saying something to the same effect.

Stop. I saw on your profile that you're sometimes hostile and don't want to be. This is one of those moments.

Count your blessings, no pun intended. I think it was really wise and honest of both of you to discuss the topic. I am an atheist and my girlfriend is religious. We also discussed it early on, and she said she could respect my position. She asked if I could respect her's, I said no, but that I could respect her ass person, always. Now, I am in a similar situation, perhaps even more dire. I live in Central America. It was God's country before there was the bible belt. My girl is a Christian, unaffiliated, who has attended church only once in the last year. This is probably as close to an atheist as I am going to find here. She is hilariously critical of the Church and certain more fringe religions like Mormons or people who see the mother mary inside a tortilla. Anyways, you dodged a bullet. If she is inviting you to study the Bible she is part of a minority of extremely religious people. The vast majority, even in Texas, probably don't even attend church regularly. I think you'll find that if being an atheist isn't a requirement for you to like someone, there are plenty of half ass fake Christians. Their belief structure works like this "I believe there is a magic happy angel flying around guiding my life and he is made of happy love sauce." They believe "things happen for a reason" and "someone is looking out for me" and for the most part those aren't particularly dangerous. This woman thinks the word of god is the bible and that the bible is this guide book to be consulted daily. The other type hasn't even read the Bible and their knowledge hardly extends beyond cartoons of baby Jesus or Noah. I couldn't stand being with someone who actually attended church regularly, or who couldnt laugh a little when i made fun of other religious people.

It is so brave to insult children. A hero really....

Alright man, for my own reasons I need to end our dialogues here man. Someone apologizing and then re-articulating the same thing they just apologized for in the next sentence hits too close to home, personally, for me right now. I really hope you can come to revisit some of this in a couple days and maybe offer some additional insight if you have any.

There is no reason to invent my thesis for me, I made it fairly clear.

My Dad didn't teach me empathy by abusing me. That is an unkind distortion of my point. My empathy isn't because of my father, it is in spite of him. My frustration, anger, come from my Dad. And the times I covered those emotions trying to be dispassionate or rational or super articulate while engaging in go nowhere arguments were also because of my father. I hope you understand these contradictions aren't rational or neutral. I find them telling. Your desire to be right comes even at the cost of trying to hurt me (trying to use my own history against me) , distort my arguments, and then contradicting yourself to avoid responsibility. Do you understand the underlying emotions going on here?

This is what I mean though. Convincing you is not an option on the table right now.

Science need a kickstarter. There are these things called open source labs, too.

It is an absurd hypothetical, and you know that. You sensed this was going to be my reply because it so obviously absurd, that you already began defending it. Then you admit your own defense wasn't really equal to the hypothetical. Water is one of the most abundant resources, it is impossible no one would want to trade it for large sums of money to a desperate but non-violent population. If there is a historical example which meets your hypothetical (A peaceful community unable to access water who can't find anyone who will trade it), post it here please. I am completely comprehending your argument, but I find it unsupported by evidence. If you want to present a reasonable criteria by which I can defend my argument, I will defend it, otherwise I don't want to get caught up in some circular battle of egos. I think my thesis is sound, and actually a valuable and profound way of looking at things often ignored, and which confirms this communities general ethics of free trade and non-violence. I gave you real examples of a country which doesn't use violence to achieve its trade goals with other countries, and that it was the most prosperous country in the region. You'll find trade between countries who are peaceful results in more resource acquisition than the resources gained by conquest. So Saddam and the Iraqi government still run the oil to their demands, without threat of violence? Let's not get caught on this topic about Iraq, please don't bother defending this plainly sophist assertion. Your approach in this topic is highlighting my point in our other topic. Your approach of trying to win this topic, is value neutral, and will never progress forward. You're not convincing me, you're going deeper into a quote hole, a tit for tat, and I have little desire to give you the benefit of the doubt because you're not treating my arguments with respect. Empathy, in this context, would be very useful to you, you could be asking questions to determine if maybe I am actually making a good point or not. Instead you're going to disagree with every single thing I am saying with any desperate and sophist argument you can. So forget this debate man, I don't care people can decide for themselves. More important to me is understanding what your motive is with this topic? Why are you trying to prove the demand for resources is sometimes best solved with violence? Have you personally used violence to gain resources? Have you, or do you currently, support people (like the US Government) who do use violence to gain resources?

Can't deny that a conspiracy theorist's distrust of government is healthier than a statists worship of the state.

Let me provide a contemporary American example. The United States went to war in Iraq, arguably to protect their access to oil. Have oil prices increased or decreased since the war in Iraq? Now, the United States enjoys a completely non-violent relationship with China. And China is the largest trade partner to the United States.

This was how we learned to respond to people challenging our thinking, right? I know I was. Whenever I disagreed with my dad, logic only went so far, and eventually you hit a wall like "because I said so" or "because you live under my roof" or "because I'm your father" The thing, for me, that helps me refrain from being abusive is to think the thought "I am being just like my father right now." Which for me personally is a repulsive idea, and I grew up being compared to him (since we look and sound so alike) and it resonates deeply. Oh, and yes, I have seen the movie The Game (which I love). Unfortunately it is one of those things you can only watch once, right? lol. EDIT: Just reviewing my replies in this discussion, and I wanted to make a note that "And there are literally infinite other examples where the means to an end are quite different than the end." is consequentialism.

I'm sure a company could profit by picking u trash or free if the trash was recyclable. Not that I really did the math on this....