Wuzzums

I don't have any good sources but I do have some guy-advice which can do wonders. Make it as blunt as possible, tell him to rub one out and rethink his actions.

I think it warrants actual research fullstop. The state is indeed to blame for these types of studies but not in the way you'd think. These state funded academics get a certain budget per year to conduct their research. If they happen to be more effective and spend less than their alloted money, the budget for the next year is gonna get cut accordingly. So in order to fix this they have a quick brainstorming meeting at the end of the financial year in order to find some clever way to spend the extra cash. This is how and why this type of "pointless" research is done.

Scientific studies which basically boil down to "we took a bunch of fMRI scans" trigger me. tl;dr version: "We don't know what is going on, we don't know how it's going on, we don't know what the consequences are, we don't know what advantages or disadvantages are, HOWEVER we do know that that SOMETHING is going on compared to when nothing is going on." It's a well established fact in the research community that the more brain scan images you put in your study, the higher media coverage it's gonna get. People love colorful pictures. Decades worth of hardcore maths and physics to study the universe and not a single eyebrow raised from the public up until the moment someone decided to literally photoshop some images and suddenly people went mental.

I wasn't talking about fat people. I was talking about people who had the propensity of being fat. A bodybuilder who has genes that allow him to store energy more efficiently is a superior bodybuilder. A mountaineer can carry less weight in food with him because he doesn't require as many calories as a normal person.

No we don't. You're assuming everyone has the same liver, pancreas, stomach, etc. We don't. Why do you think each race has a different type of preferred diet?

I don't think you're looking at it correctly. People who are genetically predisposed to being fat have an advantage regardless of scarcity of food. In a resource scarce environment, they have a higher likelihood of surviving. In a resource rich environment they require less calories for sustenance, having thus more resources to spare because they don't need to spend as much money on food. A propensity for getting obese also teaches one self control, which again is an advantage over others. I see you're really for propagating superior genes. That is confusing because eliminating the propensity for obesity would also eliminate a lot of high performance athletes. I assume you don't consider people that can lift cars and pull trucks to be genetically inferior. Obesity is not due to genetics, it's due to free will, or lack thereof. Letting obese people die off will not eliminate the fat genes from the human gene pool, it will eliminate the lack of control genes from the gene pool.

"It's a beautiful thing, the destruction of words."

safe space = fainting couch

I use the socratic method, wait until they contradict themselves (always happens), then I point out their inaccuracy, and then try to weasel in some volunatarist/libertarian ideals by suggesting some sort of solution. However recently I have become disillusioned with people and stopped wasting my energy with the message. I might add some principle or another in a conversation to see who bites. If they act interested and start asking me questions I try to show them the path, if not I move on.

Is discriminating all Muslims really inaccurate? If not all Muslims are the same then what are those which are good people doing about it? Surely if you accept being part of such a great community, you should be outraged when someone strays from the path. A scientist who falsifies data is fired. So where's the outrage from the Muslim community? Christians asked for blood with the whole pedophile priests scandal. Where's the outcry from the good muslims for all the rapes and molestation? The data is clear from my perspective therefore it is only rational to discriminate against the whole, until proof of the contrary is given of course.

It's a play on the fact that there is evil in the world. If God has full control then he cannot be all good because he allows evil exists, and if he is all good then he is not all powerful because he cannot change the evil that exists. Never heard that specific wording before, might just be the case Goyer came up with it.

Oh gosh, I saw that guy's video. When someone pulls the victim card in front of strangers (millions of strangers in his case) my empathy circuitry shuts down and I suddenly become very suspicious and mildly amused. But is this a door that should be opened? Serious philosopher debates character comedian on YouTube?

I cannot prefer murder in the same way I cannot enjoy not having fun.

Look at it this way. We define morality not that which is good or not evil, but that which can be applied universally. With this new rule we can easily conclude that murder is not moral/universally applicable. This applies to theft, rape, or any other action which humans considered imoral since before phylosophy. We don't start from the get go with "murder" as an evil act. We start with the definition, which is taking someone's life against their will. The definition alone implies it cannot be universally applicable, otherwise what is going on is not murder but something else. Make abstraction of everything Stefan said in his book. Do you agree that my completely original "universally applicable" principle for morality is sound?

I think you guys are taking this too seriously. She's a comedian, she says shocking things not because of personal opinion but to get a reaction. Sometimes the two coincide, sure, but it's hard to say when that's the case.

When debating a socialist, is spitting in their face considered a valid argument?

Elephant in the room, what's with the user name?

Written by another person with no experience whatsoever in the medical industry but with a lot of certainty that he does. If big pharma were to spend 90% on r&d and 1% on marketing, will that be ideal for him? Whose to say r&d requires so much funding. Surely if a product works it's pointless to research it further and more essential to get it out in the market. Furthermore, how is marketing not part of research? More people using a product is indicative of the product's efficiency.

The socialist party called the idealistic people that forwarded their ideology "useful idiots" because they had no idea they were helping people that wanted to destroy them. Once they gained power, the useful idiots were the first to be eliminated. Anonymous coined the term "newfag" to describe the very same type of people.

I don't have anything against anonymous because anonymous holds no principles to be against. If you think they're doing something good or they're standing up to something then you're getting trolled. If you think you're getting trolled then they troll you again by actually doing something worthwhile. They do things not out of principle but because they can, or because it's funny. Are you familiar with the newfag/oldfag terminology?

I'm curious, for how long have you been familiar with the group Anonymous?

You can't be racist for posting an image, you can however be racist for being white.

The comment section of the video is gold. Absolutely no one fell for it, in fact it backfired with people saying it's not an anti-Trump vid but a pro-Hitler vid. "if they lied about Trump, did they also lie about Hitler?" We truly live in the most interesting times where the underdog in the presidential race for the free world is a multi billionaire.

This is not reputation, this is democracy. Reputation is acquired by what other people say about you first hand. We actually know and trust the middleman. Here we don't know the middleman. We just know what a bunch of people we never met say about another person we never met. Letting other people make decisions for you is the essence of democracy. I see you can choose what recommendations go on your profile. This is foolproof, it will in no way whatsoever be abused.