kcq

you can always homeschool your kids while enrolling them in many clubs. One sad reason i hear people like about sending their kids to school is to get "rid" of them, as in they can't keep up their sanity while their child annoys them at home. I don't know how viable it is, but sending your kid to KG and informing his teachers that you take responsibility for his "education" and he's only there to see what groupwork and groupthink are. You tell your kid he's there to make buddies and have a "good" time. Make sure he practices self-discipline, honesty, and logic. That way you can get a bit of both if you're doubting your decision, and from KG you can hopefully come to a solid decision

doesn't have to be because of monarchy, i'd attribute this to the low population if anything. Look at norway in comparison

note: http://freedomainradio.com/Podcasts.aspx is giving me network error i vaguely remember stef had a sunday call-in about how to deal with your significant other being a sociopath as well as several podcasts and youtube videos titled something else that talked about removing sociopaths and spotting them in your life. would anyone be so kind as to link them

@FreeEach: you must very well understand that criticising stefan's character in this domain will only result in *summon random stefan followers* to direct their fangs at you. The context of what you say could be very well true, but the delivery is too straightforward that it will look like an attack, and in this part of the internet where stefan is held highly, you have to be cunning in delivery.

very interesting and well put. there is a fine line between perception and sensation or experience. "Preferences are derived from perceptions which are a result of sensory experiences." "The parent's preferences have a higher value compared to the child's preferences." "Therefore the validity of the parent's preferences trumps the child's perception, not his sensual experience." i say this distinction not because of semantics. But because this has to do with suppression vs repression. "The second premise is foundational to authoritarian parenting and the conclusion gives birth to the seed of doubt in the senses for the child." is it doubt, simply repressing the truth in the senses? or is it actively suppressing the truth which brings us to "He needs to confirm that the parents can accurately perceive and act on his preferences. When the parents don't meet this need for mirroring, they sow the seed of doubt."

our first and nearest proximity is arguably our body. failing to take care of that says alot of things on many levels. Our body is responsible for a majority of things in your life experience. some here might feel a disconnect between body and mind, other treat that as one. Having a body in a good condition helps you with self-defense, physical contact with objects, posture, health as mentioned, movement, and self-esteem among many others. in one hour at any given time of the day, you can exercise your whole body, read 10 pages of a book, cook a meal, listen to a podcast, organize your stuff, and listen to your thoughts.

a very illuminating post. All FDR members are recommended to exercise and take care of their health. What also helps is having a good diet. Consuming the right amount of the right types of food helps your whole body and mind especially if you're planning to exercise. I always thought religions in far east asia had strict regimen of training the body, for example monks who train martial arts every single day. But the disconnect is certainly there when you incorporate western religions who consider the body as a temporary vessel.

How does islam effect your life contrary to atheists in FDR.

the distinction lies in sharing vs consuming. to consume shared intellectual property is amoral. but to share intellectual property without consent is immoral. Did i get that right?

I often see them NOT used as classifications, but as traits. the same person could exhibit some alpha traits and beta traits. it's just a way to categorize behavior.

I was talking with a friend about intellectual property, one thing lead to another and i did not know how whether IP is moral or immoral, i thought if it is amoral even though i don't feel that it is in the realm of aesthetics. i don't feel there is a distinction between Music albums, Movies & TV series, Books, when it comes to inherent moral reasoning. So what would be strong arguments and counter arguments if you happen to think intellectual property is amoral?

whatever guys. whatever.

how is the social contract in any way a NAP

wonderful post. A few points: it is quite true that it seems or is as a matter of ffact contradictory. So far I don't have anyone in my social circle who i ought to act morally with. Which in turn makes me act on instinctual ethics and getting as much as i can out of life while cutting my losses.

offtopic: how many of you feel empathy when you learn of the casualties of world one, how many of you feel empathy towards the 100s of thousands of children dying of famine. i noticed this lots of times in history classes whenever the talk is on the past, people don't bat an eyelash. Now if you tell them, a nearby school just got annihilated or starved to death, they might feel a bit of empathy. going back to the main topic. Why do you people act moral with immoral creatures? As long as we understand ethics, as long as we understand more about morality, as long as we look more into self knowledge. i ought to behave in a nice manner with others? others who are immoral, abusive, statists. the irony, is that these people who act like this are materially getting more to fill their twisted egos. My question is. Once i grasped the concepts that are set in place, why should i ought to act in a universally preferable way? when i feel like acting the opposite way reaps me more. It's like because i can see how immoral some of people's actions are, and because i understand how others who are not necessarily immoral, but support immoral people be it in family, friends, politics, etc. I feel like i ought to act in a structured well thought out way to not get preyed upon, to get the better half of deals, to be independant, to be capable of being a leader of my self first and foremost. Basically, not letting anyone use me or eat some of my rights in scenarios. I feel that i ought to only act in an excellent fashion with a handful of individuals in life who are high value, true to their selves, act with integrity etc. if the counter-argument is, if everyone acts like an asshole then yada yada.. don't bother posting premises that are not in accordance with reality. let me know your thoughts.

Excellent write-up Wesley. very accurate, precise, and well-defined.

i am interested because most of the mainstream moral reasoning is based upon those 4 which branch utilitarianism, mutualism, panarchy etc. Not that i'm advocating any of these. i like to see the discrepancies found in each of them.

Is friendship important? Definitely. If so, why? Friends act as a logical consistency detached from your personal emotional bias on any relevant issue. More importantly, They will be there to tend to your wound before your hands reach. ALSO, is it important to have friends before getting into a romantic relationship? Romance doesn't exist. Does it have any bearing on your "being happy with yourself" (aka your personal well-being and satisfaction with yourself)? Ask yourself, does validation from significant others the only reason that brings you happiness?

both that and real-time relationships were eye-opening. thanks!

I'm interested in debates regarding deontological vs consequential vs character vs motive ethics. going through UPB book was a wonderful experience. shoutout to all of you