LovePrevails

I'm just saying that self-esteem is a phrase which is individually defined, how it is defined will determine whether you think it is a helpful turn of phrase or not.

thank you for offering what you have shared, you have raised some good point I will keep in mind particularly about "not putting responsibility" where it is due and about my vagueness which probably stemmed from a rush of temper at the time.

I found the video a very interesting perspective, the view that you should look and assess your actions in isolation, not hinge your entire self-image upon them seems a very sensible and zen-like approach, which is also the basis of offering specific criticism or praise in books like NVC, and also How To Talk So Kids Will Listen and Listen So Kids Will Talk However, I think it misses the main way people categorise self-esteem, which is a general view of how people tend to think of themselves. Bad or Good? Worthy or Unworthy? On a day to day basis, an average - some days I have higher or lower self-esteem than others. I have more self-esteem in general since I discovered how much service my skills can be to others because I feel I have something to offer the world, That makes me feel better about me. Is that fallacious thinking?

should be viewable now

thanks I've now made it public

am I right or wrong in what I am saying? is Scilla right or wrong is what she is saying? why?

That's an interesting perspective as I'm in the UK and it went completely differently over here!The anti-war movement had run out of steam long before Obama got elected, in 2008/2009 or so, a socialist group based at the uni bussed a bunch of us down to protest the war outside the labour party conference there was definately a feeling there like these were "the last men standing" who were still turning up to keep the wheels of the anti-war movement turning mostly the usual suspects who would turn up to anti-cuts protest today

What I always find really retarded about the anti-cuts movements is they always have these idiotic slogans like "ABSOLUTELY NO CUTS" which sounds extremist/insane/irrational even to centrist people when they could maybe actually mobilize some cross-political-spectrum support with something more along the lines of hey, if you don't have money for grandmas pension you sure as fuck don't have money to CONTINUE FIGHTING TWO WARS if the anti-austerity movement proposed cuts to the warfare state as the alternative instead of "No Cuts" sloganeering then they could reignite the anti-war movement which ran out of steam after a couple of years of being ignored.

Training as a therapist - statist regulations it would take up to or exceeding 7 years. In a free market where ability to perform the job was the basis on which qualifications were handed out, I could probably do the training in a year or so given the work I have been doing independently.

Hey I just interviewed Pete Gerlach of sfhelp.org! Please check it out and feedback, I think the info in this video is of vital interest and importance, I hope you all agree. The link is: Please let me know what you think!

Emotions arise as a combination between the situation and what we are bringing to it so if you are late to meet me, if I am hanging under a tree reading a book I don't mind because I'm already engrossed, if however I'm desperate to get tickets then I'm annoyed, restless, anxious perhaps angry at you. So while someone can't cause you an emotion in the way they cause you a bruised shin when they kick you, their actions can elicit an emotional reaction. The ability to distinguish "when you said... ... I felt guilty, and I think you said it because you wanted me to feel guilty so that I would do xy" from "you made me feel guilty," or "you were manipulating me" which are comparatively very vague statements that are more likely to escalte a conflict is a meaninful skill please feedback on me if I have misspoken here

yay http://jezebel.com/spanking-for-jesus-is-exactly-as-fucked-up-as-it-soun-514271243

lol thanks seems like I'm blind

I can't see them Published on Apr 26, 2013 Stefan Molyneux, host of Freedomain Radio, presents a collection of information detailing the foundational lies, fraudulent claims, unaccountability, failure, environmental, economic and human costs of the decade long Iraq War. Freedomain Radio is 100% funded by viewers like you. Please support the show by signing up for a monthly subscription or making a one time donation at: http://www.fdrurl.com/donate Bitcoin Address: 1Fd8RuZqJNG4v56rPD1v6rgYptwnHeJRWs Get more from Stefan Molyneux and Freedomain Radio including books, podcasts and other info at: http://www.freedomainradio.com Sources: http://www.fdrurl.com/hell Freedomain Radio Facebook: http://www.fdrurl.com/fb Freedomain Radio Twitter: https://twitter.com/freedomainradio [*] Category News & Politics [*] License Standard YouTube License no sources

this jsut reminded me of Aristotle's physics, like things fall to the ground because they tend towards a state of rest (instead of gravity)they made great sense 2,500 years or so a go, they were just wrong.

you coul always go ahead and ask him why he believes that is true you can't really argue with a preference, you can change peoples opinions if they are opinions most people believe lots of things just becasue they "prefer" them to be true, despite any evidence, those views are almost impossible to change

Well? what's your alternative suggestion to trusting the evidence of your senses? "we [/anchor]do not regard any of the senses as Wisdom; yet surely these give the most authoritative knowledge of particulars. But they do not tell us the 'why' [anchor=66]of anything-e.g. why fire is hot; they only say that it is hot. " - Aristotle.

K you on skype?

This story was just wretched feel so much empathy for the caller If he is a member on the board I'd like to encourage him to add me on Skype -> amashaman I think I have some resources to share to help him along the way.

Any one care to respond to this disgusting article? "Firm discipline including slapping your wife if accepable provided it is accompanied by love and affection, a study said yesterday." http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/392948/Why-tough-love-slapping-works

Hey where did this fact that Stefan Molyneux has said a couple of times: "The iraq war goes through as much gasoline in a day as the Indian economy" Most people are very skeptical about this, understandably, and it has never been sourced.

I believe you could say that in certain circumstances there are 'mitigating circumstances' to stealing Such as in the argument that's given That doesn't make it Right If I come home after a bad day and snap at you You may acknowledge me being under pressure as a mitigating circumstance That doesn't mean I was treating you well.

hey stef and coI think this recent video actually missed most of the important arguments and information regarding free market sustainability The main of the video was the following arguments (maybe I've missed a couple, if so please add) 1) in free market resources go to who can create them most efficiently 2) state subsidises inefficient use of respurces 3) as resources become more scare prices go up so alternatives will be found. When you say that 'the reason we know that recycling is inefficient is no one is paying you for the glass bpttle' or whatever, you miss out the main point which is that *the state is responsible for picking up your garbage* !! That means recyclers are competing against a subsidised/free service which makes their own look more expensive because you don't have to pay to get your garbage collected, if people did have to pay to get their garbage collected then they might find it was cheaper to recycle. What is more, because of the fact that people wouldn't want to produce much garbage because they would be paying for the collection, they would avoid buying products that had unnecessary packaging. When you go to the supermarket it's full of all these one-use-only packaging and intend which are made of composites of chemicals hitch are hard to break down. In a fee market you might be charged a fortune for the disposal of things that were hard to break down. Things that could be recycled easily, or composted, on the other hand, would either be free to dispose of (as someone would be happy to pick them up) or even sometimes be paid for. /so the whole economy would shift towards a more sustainable use of resources through people avoiding high waste disposal combats, and products would be specifically packaged in recyclable or reducible packaging , products would also be designed with easy disposal in mind . This would be a massive environmental effect. What is more state is also responsible for locating landfill sites, etc. how do we know landfill is the most efficient until we put it tithe free market? We Gav. No idea! These sites are an eye sore and an environmental issue, especially when there are batteries and things discarded there. Without state subsidisation landfills would be more expensive and a less efficient use of land so they would be a less popular option. Again this supports a move towards making everything that is produce more easily recyclable or reducae. Im sure there at either points I've yet to consider but I think the packaging/one-use-disposable argument is THE most important one to impress upon environmentalists and liberals. In my experience they can really see the sense of the argument. The thing is people like the convenience and abdication of personal responsibility which comes from passing the buck on to the state.

Hey here is the new parenting resource and we just hit 100 subscribers! yay! I think it's probably my best delivery so far, please be darlings and share it - support meeee :) my payment is helping people so help me get paid! hahaha