Slavik

"Prove that you've dealt with your trauma in therapy, that you've done fearless self-work and treated your addictions. Prove that you're doing something important with your life, or at least that you've ended the cycle of abuse." Mainly this part, being "dealt with trauma" I am personally dealing with mine and I honestly think it will never be dealt with, it will be my life long process. All the work that many people are doing is ongoing, and will be ongoing for a very long time, I am not ready to discount such people. I might be wrong, but just my opinion. "Prove that i am doing something important with my life" Considering that I am at the very beginning of self work and recovery, the first mile of my journey, I do not yet have the capacity to do something important, I am planning to, just not yet. So looking over these particular statements, I can see myself being discounted as I dont fit, I dont want to discount people who are work in progress, and I hope not to be discounted out of hand by others as well. Granted I might have misunderstood, I am open to clarifications of course.

Are we looking for perfection? Why? Many things you have mentioned, I can clearly say that I am in the process of dealing with, have quiet a few faults that I am working on. Looking at your post I guess person like me would never be welcome. So why look for perfection instead of people who are working on themselves.

Hi Alvaro, can you tell us what thoughts you are having when you have these emotions come up? Are there any worries, perhaps images of the kittens suffering? It is empathy, if you are seeing images of the kitten suffering, and or being alone, it is very possible that you also empathize with what the kitten has possibly gone though, being you might have gone through similar in your childhood.

Wuzzums said that for a man, he the man gets just as much satisfaction from a 1 inch as a man with a 10 inch. In other words a man with a 1 inch will ejaculate just as much as a 10 inch, thus will gain satisfaction to the same degree as the 10 inch man, its women who do not get satisfaction from smaller sizes, thus making a woman problem. I am not sure what you are replying to though.

http://beingclassicallyliberal.liberty.me/2014/05/18/no-denmarks-mcdonalds-employees-arent-making-21hr/

http://catherine-b-silver.com/docs/womb_envy.pdf Not sure if this is exactly what you are looking for, hope this helps

Im not sure what you mean by "it fails" If you mean the argument for UPB in your proposed explanation, then I do not see how it fails. If you want someone to kill you its no longer murder, its called assisted suicide.

Can you start with definitions please. Nation - an arbitrary geographical region with people controlled by government Government - bunch of people controlling other people If you boil it down, its all just people. You can not have a rule of or by majority or minority, it becomes logically inconsistent. A majority does not get special powers which makes their decrees any more moral by the simple fact of numbers. In all of your propositions you are suggesting a monopoly on force, how is this monopoly going to sustain itself ? How does a state enforce its monopoly on police force ? Do you think they ask nicely? How do you imagine a monopoly of force to be accountable for anything? What you have suggested here, is pretty much the way USA has started, and look where its now. The main point I am trying to get across though, is the fact that you do not like something is really not an argument. You absolutely have to stay logically consistent.

And all she has learned is that if she hits, she will get hit by you, nothing more nothing less. Fire? What does fire has to do with anything.

Begin to develop, not fully developed, and at age 12 is the beginning of true understanding. My argument is that children are suppose to be taught not hit. Just because you think its ridiculous, doesn't change scientific facts. There is no contradiction in the quotes I have provided. You keep on arguing from your own perspective, which is completely non scientific and illogical. Hitting a child is not teaching. And you have yet to provide any studies which show that hitting children = teaching. Yes, we are back to you saying so.

What children need to understand at any age, is not that daddy or mommy will beat them, but that if they hit, they are hurting someone. Her upset is what parents normally deal with first, which isnt a fast process, after that the recommendation is to spend time teaching a child that hitting is wrong, there are many ways of doing that, hitting only gets an already upset child even more upset and angry. Talking about genetics. Genetics is absolutely indefensible position. If a person is genetically predetermined to be a certian way, then hitting them will not teach anything, remeber they are genetically predetermined to be that way. Again you are ignoring moral agency Quote:"Toddlers, from ages 2 to 7, perceive the world through magical thinking and animism (attributing human emotions and characteristics to inanimate objects). They are acquiring motor skills during this stage, and a certain amount of “decentering” begins to occur. At this stage, the child is still unable to think logically. At age 7 to age 12, children begin to understand logical or rational thought, but only concretely — in relationship to things they can see or touch. They are also noticeably better at seeing another’s point of view and considering others’ feelings." Basically you are completely ignoring scientific data on the manner, assigning moral agency to a child, and instead of teaching (which takes time) you bring up NAP (which has to do with actors with full cognitive agencies ) and attribute it to a child who has yet to develop it. Then you come back saying that logically we cant prove you wrong. Scientifically you have been proven wrong. On the exaggerated example this is why there is no death penalty for mentally retarded (no full comprehension) All you end with is ,she understand because I say so.

1) Your logical defense of spanking? In order to assign moral agency, a person you assigning it to needs to be able to comprehend it. You might want to look up "4 cognitive stages of childs development". Attributing moral behavior to children is like attributing responsibility to ancients who didnt use antibiotics. It is not that people arent able to counter your defense of hitting children, it is simply that you are not willing to recognize long ago accept facts of moral agency in children. 2) You have talked to her about her hitting? Im curious what did she say? Why did she hit? 3) By nature having a lot of impact I assume you mean epigenetics ? The genes that turn on and off as an adaptation to the environment that you create and /or place your child into? You thought she was a sociopath? How do you know that? Have you taken her to the doctor to do the extensive diagnosis which is required for that? And do you even know that sociopaths do not respond to punishment? You are making a lot of assumptions, and I am seriously not sure why. What is that need you have to hit a little child?

Are you sure she understand, or does she simply does not aggress in front of you? From my own personal experience, my older brother was hit for hitting me, which ended with him abusing me even more when the parents were no looking. Seriously your approach to children being selfish or being born a certain way, is absolutely unfounded, and quiet frankly very unnerving. It is not only you she might have learned that hitting is ok. Did you even find out why she was hitting? Did you talk to her?

Why do you think its mathematically impossible when you have just shown the math? You just shown in a simple way how this works, you spend an X amount and you collect a percentage point from the profit. Where is the impossibility?

Dude Im replying to a person on spanking, what the heck are you talking about?

From a simple logical stand point, it is you who is responsible for your child's development (they are not fully developed) Which means it is you who is responsible with your childs behavior, if he /she is acting out and hitting you. There is no assigned moral responsibility to children simply because they are cognitively incapable of many things, you are trying to assign that responsibility when the whole world already knows this distinction.

I have actually changed my approach to the conflict, after looking into more evidence and facts.

When you get anxious, what goes through your mind? What are the thoughts, try writing the down, which thought stops you from approaching? In another way "if the anxiety could speak at that moment, what would it say?"

Hi rayamato, thank you for telling your story. Sorry to hear that, I can imagine how frustrating this must be. The common theme in all of your stories, seems to be your fear. Try reaching it, and let it "speak" what doe it say? When you imagine actually asking a girl out and then going out with her, what kind of a feeling do you get, and what are the thoughts behind it? Considering your unfortunate childhood, your parents are your template for how to be. It could very possibly be that what you saw at home, the negativity repulses you, as in you absolutely do not want to repeat the same.

Hi Hugs, thank you for sharing. In which way do you suspect for the experiences to be dangerous? As far as the rest goes, to me it sounds like there are 2 things going on. 1) You clearly have a great amount of empathy (which in itself is a great thing) 2) The imagined old abusers face, is actually yourself as a child. This is what I am not sure that you have processed. When you were abused as a child this is what they saw, and instead of stopping the abuse immediately, they have continued. You wept, they kept abusing. Maybe this perspective will help you. I am curious though, what do you think the danger might be? Professional help is always great, even if you think you dont need it, it wont hurt, you will still benefit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-keZ6dfePM

you forgot kisses

I guess I am confused by what you mean to be relevant then. Israel has Zionism, it has Religion and Statism as well as child abuse and circumcision , yet you pick procrastination? I am really not sure what you mean by relevant at this point. I guess I have a question so I can understand you better Question: when you say relevant to Israel, what exaclty are you trying to accomplish? As in, what do you want people to know/learn? Information isnt always comfortable.

If he loves philosophical debates, try doing a role reversal with him, see if he can defend your position, and him yours. This exercise might shed some light on what the perspectives are, as well as where the holes in thinking are. Also, this approach tends to put people on the opposite sites, allowing for the less emotional discussion.

I was thinking about it, here is a thought though. Even though Sweden is less religious, it is still very government reliant, which is on par with religion in my pinion. Government also relies on a huge amount of inflicted "doublethink"