LifeIsBrief

I agree completely... but it's interesting to note, that part of agreeing, is having faith that if the piece of mirror sunk in, something would have changed. So, in some ways, it's a question of whether or not you have faith in humanity. Given, that people ended up watching his show for entertainment, was his decision the lesser of two evils? That's what makes it such a beautiful set up. If people would have thought it was entertainment anyway, and would not have changed at all... He made the right choice. Didn't he? Again, thanks though, because every episode presented fascinating moral questions, that one was just the most intense.

"It's not hard to realize why hitting a child is so cowardly and petty. Nobody is that stupid" I think this is the core of our disagreement. Yes, almost all people obviously were that stupid, for almost all of human history. What you're really saying here, is that nobody is dumb enough to believe what they're told. Human beings learn by watching and become creatures of habit. I just think it's very weird how a lot of people here immediately compare a parent who spends 99% of their time helping a child, and 1% slapping them... to rapists and murderers. It seems like people here think that slapping makes you a horrible human being that no one should have sympathy for. People who don't have sympathy for 90% of their country, kinda scare me. Even though you're right that slapping is wrong. This would be my response ThoughtTerrorist too. If you started smacking me, we're both adults, and you haven't been propagandized by all of society that violence among adults is acceptable. You also didn't feed cloth and spend 99% of your time nurturing and helping me for 3 decades. If we were close friends for ten years, I knew you were abused, and one day you got drunk and hit me, yes, I could probably forgive you. It's the absolutism that worries me. Also STer, yeah, I'm arguing that lots of behavior is unconscious conformity, could be wrong.

Okay... Everyone might hate me after I write this... but, let's do it. Either I have issues that I need to resolve, or there are serious flaws in your logic. More likely, both, because I already know I have to work on myself a lot more. "I don't think you give parents enough credit. Parents know what they are doing" Evidence please... Have you seen the society we all live in? The history of human civilization? Constant war, murder, and self destruction ringing any bells? Rampant statism?... Am I the only one who sees it? Maybe it's just because I have a mild form of Aspergers, but every time I hear a young woman tell me that she wants to have children, I immediately ask "Are you happy?", because it's the obvious question... They look at me like I have 5 heads. Most people have absolutely never considered the idea that it would be immoral to have children if they were unhappy, because that's not part of the propaganda they are fed every day of their lives. Most people don't question anything. People are dumb as hell. Occasionally, they'll even try to tell me that "science has proven that having children releases endorphins". To that I want to respond "So you're certain that will be enough endorphins?", and sometimes I do, it doesn't go over well. Where is the evidence for all of these brilliant self aware people in our species history? A couple of them wrote books, but were they listened to by the masses? How does recommending "Atlas Shrugged" go over in modern society? Do a lot of people look at you like you're probably a greedy jerk? A lot of people look at me that way when I recommend it. What did Stefan say in his most recent video? Consistently less than .5% of people vote libertarian, despite it's obvious advantages. "I'm always a little annoyed to see how quickly people credit abuse to ignorance"... I'm always a little annoyed when people put words in my mouth that have nothing to do with what I said. I credited spanking, to being beaten by a drunk alcoholic war veteran. Hurt people, hurt people. I credited unhappy people having children, with ignorance. Not just ignorance, but ignorance and propaganda, if you don't see evidence of that rampant ignorance and propaganda... open your eyes. "And sympathy is to say to yourself that if you were in the same situation, you might do the same thing"... Yeah, if I was beaten, bruised, and bloodied by an alcoholic father who hit my mother, and was then told my entire life that spanking is how you discipline a child, I might have spanked my child, as 90% of people in America do. Does that make me a horrible human being? Can you have sympathy, for people who do horrible things? No? I'm inclined to dismiss you out of hand then. I have complete and utter sympathy for someone who abuses drugs, or steals food, because they're miserable and broken human beings. How many times do I have to say, that having sympathy for another human being isn't the same thing as excusing their horrible actions? I have a lot of sympathy for an incompetent, and unemployed man who steals food to feed himself, or his family, and then serves time for it. No amount of prison time is enough for you? No matter how many times he's raped for robbing a liquor store you have no sympathy whatsoever? I have news for you then... You might be a psychopath. I would never hit my child... partially because I wasn't beaten by my father, and didn't see him ever strike my mother. My father was beaten by his, and his father beat my grandmother, and died an alcoholic at 52. Did my father let my mother get away with slapping me... yes. That was a horrible thing to do, here's the thing though... He also worked 80 hours a week to live in a neighborhood with a good school district. Did my mother slap me too much? Did she scream a whole lot? Yes. Her father, beat the living crap out of her and everyone in her family, and people told her to slap me when I was bad. Teachers listened to bully peers, and told her I was starting fights with them, rather than the other way around. The state told her over and over again, that I was violent, while I was actually being bullied. All this after she got home from working 50 hour weeks. I have lots of sympathy, for miserable, misinformed people. There is absolutely no reason not to. My father kept himself entirely in control, and my mother never hit me with a closed fist or implement. This is a huge improvement, and still nowhere near enough. She spent the next decade miserable, and constantly feeling bad for the slapping she did give me. Never blamed her parents, took full responsibility, and has been trying to make it up to me ever since. Life is hard, and for most people a painful struggle. I have sympathy for my mother, and if that makes you want to dismiss me out of hand, without knowing me, you haven't thought it through.

Just because people so rarely go hardcore, right out of the gate... How do you prove there is free will, using the scientific method? You light yourself on fire to protest something. There is absolutely no reason for a gene responsible for that to ever manifest itself, if you believe in causality. Unless you're a determinist who believes that human beings are "special" animals. Every other animal, always runs from fire.

I completely agree James. I would only suggest that having sympathy for someone, is not the same as allowing them to abandon personal responsibility. I can have sympathy for my grandparents being drafted, and still think they became cruel human beings who do not deserve respect, and should be avoided, and shunned, at all costs. Maybe I just feel that there is room to look at peaceful parenting in geologic time, the way we look at ending the state in geologic time.

I just wanted to thank you for recommending the series. I would never have discovered it without this post, and it was fantastic. Anyone who likes some of the classic "The Twilight Zone" episodes should love "Black Mirror". "Fifteen Million Merits" may be the most beautiful one hour tragedy I've ever seen. It would be really difficult to answer this without spoiling the content... but I'm curious... Would the knife sinking in, have been a less tragic ending?

Most people who fought in World War 2 and Korea, did not choose military service... they were drafted. I know one of my grandparents was drafted, but I believe they both were. They both left as soon as the war was over. I still have almost no sympathy for how they treated their wives and children, it really was subhuman, and evil. I do have some sympathy, for my mother, who was beaten as a child, taught by society that hitting children was an acceptable form of discipline, overworked, and unhappy. This still excuses none of her behavior. I choose to look at what she went through, and the society she grew up in, and see the causes of her violent and immoral behavior. I have used the sympathy created by this, as a bridge to forgiveness, and we now have a healthier, and more loving relationship then I ever could have imagined as a child, because of this. I don't know if she really deserves this forgiveness, but I have to say, that I'm a happier person, because I have given it to her.

I wouldn't claim to speak for LP, but what I mean, when I say he doesn't cut parents enough slack... Is that in the 20 or so podcasts I've seen with callers, the investigation into the family always stops at the parents. This makes perfect sense philosophically, because despite anything that happened in your parents past, they should have lived healthy, and happy lives, before they chose to reproduce. Anything other than that, is categorically immoral. Most people still don't see things this way. Lots of unhappy people have children, and their families, friends, and even the state encourage it. You're "supposed" to have children, and many people never understand what a vital moral choice this is. It also makes sense for times sake, getting into grandparents would take forever. That said... One of my grandfathers fought in World War 2, and lost many of his friends, seeing horrifying and terrible things that I can't imagine. The other fought in the Korean War, which was slightly smaller, but not much better. They came back angry, and sad alcoholics, and they took it out on their families. I cannot excuse their behavior, but it was a tragedy all around. They didn't set out to become the people they became, they dealt with the horrible conditions they were thrust into, and they did it poorly. In much of the Western World, depending on your age, this is the story of your grandparents. Your grandmother worked in a factory, and your grandfather risked his life in one of the most catastrophic events in human history. Again, this does not excuse the fact that they often became almost subhuman... but it does give me reason to have some sympathy for them. Almost all of human life was a tragedy, nearly world wide before the end of the second World War. It was a constant struggle for the working class to barely survive. In many places, it still is. I just worry, that there's no room for the question "Did your parents do a better job with you, than their parents did with them?", in the philosophy. Relativism is useless in pure philosophical terms, but if you want to forgive your parents their trespasses against you, it might be worth examining the people and environment which created them... and cut them a little slack, that, in all honesty, they might not objectively deserve. Certainly, quite a few of the stories I've heard on FDR suggest that "No, it wasn't even a tiny bit better than my miserable WW2 fighting grandfather", and in that case sometimes you do simply need to cut dangerous and destructive people out of your life. I just worry there's a bit of a middle ground, in which small amounts of progress have been made, and that might be worth recognizing. Maybe it's the Buddhist in me. In one of the Dalai Lama's books, he suggested that you're a Buddhist if you believe in the "four noble truths", which suggests that I am one. "Suffering is inherent in life. The reason for suffering is ignorance, and confusion. The suffering can be overcome. The path to the cessation of suffering is to gain knowledge, eliminate confusion, and engage in kind and loving behavior to all people"... would be the cliff notes version. Sometimes I think Stef forgets, is unwilling to accept, or simply disagrees, that a lot of the people doing harm are just suffering, stupid, and unhappy. Very rarely though, usually he's right on the money, even if he has extreme distaste for Buddhism.

Very well put Love Prevails and Pepin... I agree entirely that Stef is on the right side of history, and fighting the good fight in a world that is far too comfortable with violence against children. I just think that sometimes he doesn't cut parents dealing with the frustrating system we all live in, and their own personal experiences, enough slack. Both of my parents descend from alcoholics that were severely physically abusive, and they both remained sober and positive influences in my life. Despite that, my mother still spanked me... a lot, and it was never productive. Often I had committed a slight, or had peers lie about something I had done to get me punished, and this was very damaging to me as a child. Still, because she realized that she was short tempered, and trusted other children, or at times teachers, more than both deserved to be trusted, she has been willing to admit her mistakes and apologize. My father never raised his hand to me, and I was never hit with an implement, as both of my parents were. In that sense, I feel relatively lucky, and I have to admit that compared to their childhood experience, they made an enormous step in the right direction. Progress is often slow, and intergenerational. None of this excuses the fact that I was occasionally hit, for things I hadn't even done... but, I do feel like my parents tried very hard, to improve their genetic line, by raising me much better than they were raised. I think that, at times, small progress should be valued. This is only a very mild criticism of Stef's approach to the family, which I find to be absolutely enlightening, and a breath of fresh air.

So, I don't know how to embed youtube videos, but there are two truly fantastic Louis CK bits on peaceful parenting, one from O&A and one from his special "Hilarious" that someone linked to once before, and in my humble opinion, they beg the question... Is Stefan a bit too hard on parents trapped in jobs, created by statism, that make them miserable? I would never hit my children, but at the same time, my mother occasionally spanked me when she was angry. She was beaten as a child, and our entire society suggested that hitting children was tolerable. We've gotten past it... It was rare, and not sadistic. There were no implements. She has apologized to me. I feel sorry for both of my parents at this point, because they really don't understand how the system works, or why they're never happy. I try to explain, but find them difficult to reason with... they were both beaten as children. Should there be a bit more sympathy for unhappy parents? Personally, I have a mixed view on it. If you're not happy, you shouldn't try to bring another person into the world, but... society does tell you to... Any thoughts? The O&A Clip is here: From Hilarious: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOxoZ3exM_Q

I love Bill Burr, and he did cut off the video too soon, and dismissed it mostly because he's a blue collar American turned off by the accent, but I have to say... There is one point at which I completely agree with him. "Go to a fucking sporting event like I did, and just be stone sober, and just sit around, and look at the fucking people, okay? Look at the shit they're eating. Look at the shit they're drinking. Look at their behavior. Look at how their clothes are hanging off their fat fucking asses... and I know, the food supply is poisoned, and I know there's a bunch of fucking lies and all that type of shit. But, is there any effort on the part of that individual? To try to squeegee in front of their fucking eyes? Or do they just accept it? And, if you do just accept it... You know, then... how do I feel bad for you?" That sounds very anarchist to me. He's saying, "It ain't happening in my lifetime, so... Fuck you!" After a few beers, sometimes that's how I feel about anarcho capitalism. I say that with the deepest love and respect. I'm converted, I love you all... but a few beers in, as a blue collar laborer myself, sometimes I just have to admit "Fuck these people, they're going to die miserable. What can I do about it?". That said, Stefan suggested that "It's not going to happen in my lifetime"... but again... Sober I agree with him. A few beers in, after working at a job I hate... "Well, thanks for being right... I guess"

I don't have children, so unfortunately I cannot give you any advice in that regard... All I can say, is that... That specialist couldn't survive in a 19th century farming community, and they should go blank themselves for suggesting that the people who feed his/her lazy entitled behind are somehow "less than". Best of luck

I wanted to write a long piece, and link to a bunch of articles when I wrote this... but I find myself lacking the motivation lately. Why don't Atheists have an awesome holiday in which robot dragons shoot fireworks out of their mouths above giant waterslides? Call it "Dragons, Fireworks, and Waterslides are Awesome"... Day. Aren't we completely free from the argument that hedonism, or aesthetics, are evil? If there was a Dragons, Fireworks, and Waterslides are Awesome Day... Wouldn't it be even more popular than Christmas? Discuss.

+1 Pretend wasn't even the right word. Though in my mind, pretend and believe, can be seen as synonyms. I am certain that it would be a lot of fun to celebrate dragons and fire for a day, if a whole lot of people participated (Think 4th of July, but international and cooler). Do I "believe" in dragons? No, but I believe they're cool looking, bursts of flame look cool, and holidays stimulate an economy. So, if I "celebrate" dragons, am I pretending, or believing? In my mind, either way, it's fun, play some music, and dance around like an idiot. To Armitage "I don't believe in belief"... in the context you use the words, I agree with you. I would however, like to suggest that part of the linguistic failing you describe is that, in my opinion and experience, when the average person uses the word "belief" they are making a happiness claim, as opposed to a truth claim. "It's nice to think"... Provided a person is honest about that, and not claiming that they, for example "know" that their beliefs are valid, more power to them. There is no rational reason to not think something that makes you happy. There is a rational reason to not claim to "know" that a particular belief makes everyone happy, or is an objective fact, without evidence.

Neil deGrasse Tyson rebuttal to Dawkins and Gervais. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzSMC5rWvos

The insanely cherry picked, super optimistic quotes that allow me to consider Neil deGrasse Tyson ambiguous about statism. I’m fully willing to admit, you have to want to see it. “Science, when done properly, is never owned by one nation or another.” “We’ve already invented America once before, it’s ripe, it’s ready, and it’s willing, I think… to be invented again.” “To an academic politics is a barrier between where you are, and where you want to land” “What one should argue is, that one should not politicize science” “The only ist I am, is a scientist… I don’t associate with movements, I don’t… I’m not an ism. I think for myself.” “At the end of the day, I’d rather not be any category, at all.” “Earthrise over the moon… There was earth, seen not as the map maker would have you identify it. No the countries were not color coded with boundaries. It was seen as nature intended it to be viewed.” … “The organization, Doctors without borders was founded in 1971. Where do you even get that phrase from? No one thought of that phrase before that photo was published, because every globe in your classroom has countries painted on it. “ “We need to look at NASA not as a handout, but as an investment.” “Another driver (for the space race)… The search for economic return, nobody wants to die, nobody wants to die poor.” … “If peaceful heads prevail then war is not the driver available to you. Let’s check our list, well kings and gods are not sufficient in modern times to undergo heavy projects such as that. What’s left? The promise of economic return.” “The bank bailout… That sum of money, is greater than the entire 50 year running budget of NASA. So when someone says, we don’t have enough money for this space probe, I‘m asking… No, it’s not that you don’t have enough money… It’s that the distribution of money that you’re spending is WARPED, in some way, that you are removing the only thing that gives people something to dream about tomorrow.”

"I'm not sure if you, even now, could state what my argument actually was. So please post your understanding of what I even argued in this thread. The bare minimum for having a discussion about my argument is accurately understanding what my argument was (which by the way, is something I determine, not you. You don't get to tell me what my argument is. I am the one who gets to say what my argument is)." Oh... I get it... You're a troll who just randomly spouts nonsense. I apologize to FDR for engaging. Your argument, is your job to get across, not your audiences. I said self defense stops being a concept once someone attacks you, but you then changed the definition to your imagined version of my argument, but it's wrong for anyone to do that to you. Ignore the undue compliment about you trying to make a valid argument.

You and I may disagree, but with a probability that either one of us could be correct. I do not claim infallibility. I would say that "self defense" is not a concept, because it relies on a physical act, someone aggressing on you. I may disagree with some forum members, because as I suggested, participating in taxation is a violation of the non aggression principle. Thus, don't pay taxes, and see what happens. Once someone attacks you physically for not paying taxes, it is no longer in the realm of theory and concept, its a physical realm attack that exists. If someone intentionally tries to enslave, or kill you, you have every right to try to stay alive, by any means necessary. Some may call this psychopathy, but.. that's on them. I am perfectly willing to admit, that if that is your definition of psychopathy, I am a psychopath.

I'm only a couple minutes in... but, I have to say that I happen to love Neil Degrasse Tyson. He is one of the only astrophysicists that makes the subject fun to listen to. Because of that, I must defend him, simply by saying that he is not suggesting that NASA never would have come along without government violence forcing it on people. What he is really saying is "What the hell was stopping you all before the government forced it on you?". This is a purely emotional defense. I may be wrong, and I'm listening to the rest, but I think it's important to suggest that it's possible he is engaging in a call to arms for scientists, and investors, rather than suggesting government is necessary. I don't see him as a hardcore statist, I see him as befuddled by our lack of interest in the only new place to get resources. Pure emotion though, and I'm listening to the rest right now, I may change my mind. Edit: Finished the clip, and I still feel the same way. I think he's more ambiguous than you give him credit for, if you account for game theory.

Read the book... especially the sequel "Speaker for the Dead"... It's the opposite. Fantastic series. The original was a tragedy, not an action book.

Yes... and I'm suggesting that you stop suggesting that things that are by my definition "not real"... Stop being argued over with violence. This may be a step further, in the right, or wrong direction, from the average FDR individual, but it is my contention that no "concept", is worth killing people over. If you have to defend yourself from someone enforcing a concept on you however, you have every right to use extreme prejudice. Edit: I just want to mention, that I have nothing against you STer, I think you're trying to make a perfectly valid argument, that I happen to disagree with, and I have enjoyed this conversation.

Concepts are not real, even my own. That's how humanity has managed to yell at itself and constantly get in fights since... forever.

This is a really long thread for something with such a simple answer... Violence created by structures, also known as governments and dogmatic religions.

Well first... I just want to point out that you cut off the first sentence. "The state does not exist, because it is simply a collection of individuals that believe insane, violent, nonsense." It's a concept, not a thing.... Like Christianity. Christianity does not exist. There are 100 different types, that believe directly contradictory things. Can you touch the state? See it? Smell it? Define it? Or is it just lines someone randomly scrawled on a map before you were born? What you can touch, is people who choose to steal your money, for that belief. Just as the Inquisition, could touch you, but Christianity, can't. Libertarians, for the most part, know that the concept of "the state" is fatally flawed, and that once people stop believing in it, it will disappear. The same is not true of things that actually exist. If everyone chooses not to believe in dogs, they don't simply disappear. It's ephemeral. The state is Tinker Bell, and we want you to stop clapping