Drew.

I find that any emotional experience is far easier to go through if I try to connect with it. Either through journaling, therapy, self-talk, or some other kind of act (creative writing helps me too).

Yeah, I hear that. Well, it could be a bit more indirect. Like, they build a reputation of being fair, which offers them greater contracts or a steeper fee for contracts. Or perhaps, there will be a bonus offered for a peaceful solution. Perhaps someone sees the tact and delicacy the party engages in and tells them about a secret treasure that is too dangerous for that NPC to chase after. Oh, and you can start out small. Like, if the PCs are starting out at level one, give them perhaps a couple of coppers or silver pieces extra, perhaps some tools, rations, a natural herb/berry/whatever that acts as a cure light, bulls strength, etc. Or have the reward come later. Like, the party receives a letter from the town mayor after peacefully resolving a conflict between the villagers and goblin tribe, where the two societies are trading and there is more wealth in the region. The letter would be about wanting to share that wealth with the party, because without them, it would never have been possible. Then, insert appropriate reward.

Personally, as a player, I have always preferred gold rewards over experience. Better to be a decked-out low-level than a broke superhero. But, I've played 3.5 where that really, really matters. So, the non-aggression principle is about using proportionate force. In general, it would be that you use enough force to get the orcs to stop. It definitely would not suit to pay the orc village in kind, because rape is not something that could really ever be justified as proportionate force, I think. Additionally, while you retaliate, some peaceful orcs might defend their village, and so some individuals who could have been peaceful might get killed because they view the party as the aggressors. THat is what you have pointed out, use enough force to stop it. That might involve killing some orcs. I think that you could use elements of UPB and the NAP to form a common law justice system. I think that just about every legal system has prohibitions on rape, murder, theft, and assault, it is just that there are inappropriate prohibitions or exceptions. Like, it's not theft if it is a tax collector. It is not murder if it's an elf. My experience with individualists is that it is like herding cats. Someone who is an individualist might be less inclined to join a group or collective. So, something organized with a lot of power and influence does not really seem like a fitting option. I think the way to go is to give the party options to engage in more preferable behavior. Always try to figure out a few ways that a problem can be solved, and be open to the party coming up with their own. It might be, for example, that to solve it perfectly-wrapped-up-neat-in-a-bow that the option is no longer on the table because of the party's prior actions/inactions, but it would be nice if it was there. I know that also a player, the quest for gold has always been a prime factor in killing everything in sight. A kobold has a magical banner? Well, if we don't kill them, then we're losing out on wealth. Much needed wealth.

As a player who has tried to follow the NAP in game at times, it is really, really difficult. So, the non-aggression principle and rights would not just apply to human beings, but it all races, species, etc that would qualify. So, going into the cave where the minotaur is "homesteading" would be trespassing and potentially followed by murder. The conflict between the goblins and the villagers? Who started it? Is it that the humans are trying to seize goblin lands and resources, or is it that the goblins started it?

I would love to see where you got this data from. I agree, all parents make mistakes. All parents harm their children. Better parents correct their mistakes, make less of them in general, and give their children the tools to fix themselves.

I have had a similar experience. No matter how hard I tried to be virtuous, I was never really happy. It wasn't until I started trying to love myself, dig into my self work, and dive in deep that I started to become really happy. Virtue flowed naturally from there, because it was a gift that I wanted to give myself.

I read that you were looking for articles about the Romanian orphanages. I had a hard time finding information about these children, and I was under the impression that you did too. I did only merely skim the articles themselves, and it seems like I was mistaken, and that this information is even more difficult to find. But, I thought that the authors and linked sources might have written other works on the orphanages or were cited by other people who might have more what you are looking for, that they might be good leads. I know it was not quite what you were looking for, but still, I thought that it might help your search.

It would not be "okay" but I don't think it would violate the non-aggression principle. I could be totally wrong about that, though. I'm definitely not an expert on applying it to analyze every minutiae of a situation. The more specific the example, the harder it can be to apply a principle. Like, in the physics of flight, we know about mass, gravity, drag, etc. but clearly labeling everything since velocity and acceleration are in constant flux is an arduous task. At this point, I don't have a lot of interest exploring further about what would be a violation of the NAP and what would not in terms of lying and its effects.

I hear that. I think that a healthy relationship will probably look different based on the two individuals involved. That a healthy relationship between Ted and Sara will be different than a relationship between Ted and Jane or Sara and Chaz. For me too, I know that I don't have any examples of healthy relationships with people that I regularly interact with or see. I do think that there are degrees of health in each relationship though, and that stitching together a quilt of healthy aspects might cover it.

http://www.apa.org/monitor/2014/06/neglect.aspx http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674724709 These should get you started, for this topic. The APA sight has citations for further articles, which if you can get access to, will have further citations or be cited by other studies which might cover the topic.

I think that would be like lying about a rape. The person will be arrested, which would be kidnapping if they are innocent, which would violate the NAP. Other slander/libel "This guy is a bad teacher/She makes an inferior product/This dog is the worst lawyer ever..." I'm not sure how the NAP would apply. I feel like there should be some kind of recourse/self-protection there. I do know that if it has been agreed to, such as in a contract, then enforcing the contract would not violate the NAP, provided that it was signed with informed consent.

That is what I was saying about the aesthetics. It is not evil/immoral to lie, but it is shitty/ugly/mean/unworthy etc. Aesthetics are values that are universally preferable, but you cannot use violence to induce good behavior. You can use violence to prevent rape, but you cannot punch someone if they lie to you. With the mention of libel and slander, there are different types of lies, for sure. With those, I am definitely open to hearing the arguments, because those are absolutely harmful lies. Personally, I try to allow some fibbing in my relationships. If someone lies to me to protect their boundaries, I might be upset about being lied to, but I can understand that they want to protect themselves. In the grand scheme of things, lying about "doing nothing" versus "I ate four sleeves of oreo cookies last night" does not significantly negatively impact me.

I said that lying to adults is not abusing them, as in, it is not the same thing and does not have the same effect as it does with children. Lying to adults can be harmful, for sure. I could have explained that better and be more aware of the language that I was using. That, abuse creates trauma creates dysfunction. That does not typically happen with adults.

If he is not initiating force against another person, then it is not immoral. Those governments are the ones initiating force. You could argue that taxes are a bribe to keep the government from seizing your property and throwing you in jail. Tell your friend to smile, be polite, and be white! That worked for me in Asia.

The second one is clearly, "It's raining men" and an homage to a musical masterpiece. Edit: Just noticed a few of those are form Salvador Dali. He made paintings that he saw when he was in a hypnogogic state