labmath2

i got 120 on this test and did only 1930 on my sat.

I imagine most of the arguments made about transgenderism can be made for most other mental illnesses. I imagine if you see people that aren't there and you know it is abnormal, you try to hide it. The difference is that non of us would defend schizophrenia as an identity (since there is no "normal" schizophrenic individual). However, for transgender, they become something that is normal for some other people. While i do not think its wrong, i think it prevents people from trying to find better solutions to the problem (one that helps you come to terms with your gender).

I see the point Thomasio is trying to make. Back in the days, if you did not get hired, you could farm or hunt for food. These days, most farm land is owned and hunting is becoming a pastime. Unless you live in certain locations, it is impossible to survive without money. This puts those some in a position where they have to take any job they get. Its hard to imagine this reality would not exist even in a stateless society.

I recently started speaking up more to people i work with and i find that its not just speaking, but the way you do it. If you just write a complaint or make a side comment, most of the time, people will see it as petty or unimportant, You have to do it in a serious way. Call the manager show him the problem in front of the people he needs to address. That will be a good time to ask them if they have good reasons for repeatedly abandoning their jobs, When something like that happens, if nothing changes, you at least have that moment as shield yourself from criticism if something happens in the future due to other people's incompetence.

Quick question, when you get the ability to upvote or downvote, is there some sort of guide that you get on recommendations of what you should upvote or downvote? If there is, then i am willing to concede the voting system is done in good faith. Without such a "guide," you just leave people to decide on their whims what they like or dislike and vote accordingly. This may not necessarily be bad, but it may sometimes turns threads into a popularity contest.

I think the writer of the article i being intentionally confusing. I assume he is familiar with calculation for slope (taking the derivative at a point). Which means unless you use one very long rail, you end up having such a small slope that its essentially a straight line. The rails are probably connecting at 179.99 degrees, which produces the straight line effect.

When people talk about the rich investing their money, thereby making everyone better off, i always wonder who is borrowing the money and how they pay back with interest without decreasing money in circulation? This definition of deflation seems to be based on the idea that money is always being sucked out of the system by the rich unless wages go up.

If you bash in your dogs head to wat it, you will get no complaints from me.

In his defense he ate the rabbit.

If you cannot survive without eating strawberry ice cream, you probably need to see a therapist.

I have two questions. Are boobies distracting to learning for half the class? Are other things that are potentially distracting banned?

Just as an aside, goverment is not a monopoly, but a geographic monopoly.

From my understandong there are two main arguments in favor of transgenderism. 1) its physiological as well as psycological, 2) its benign. On the second point, what is benign has always been a matter of public opinion. Public nudity is still considered somehow damaging to children. On the first and more important point, almost all psychological problem has a physiological component (almost all that have been well researched). The question then is about which version of reality is more real, the one constructed by your brain or the one outside of it? Mental ilnesses like schizophrenia have given us some answer when it comes to this question. When the person's brain deviates from reality, treat the brain. The simple answer for transgenderism would be a treatment that reconfigures the persons brain. If we change reality outside the persons brain to more closely match what is in their brains, we will most likely do a terrible job of it. All transgenders will never truly experience what it is like to be the opposite gender. I am not familiar with the science of how effective gender reassignment suggery is in alleviating many of the discomfort resulting from their condition. The real concern is that by embracing gender reassignment as the only solution, we stop looking for better ones.

Wasatchman, did you redefine self defense while we werent looking? On the topic of intent, imagine everyone knows i want my neighboor dead. One night i walk up to his house (still on sidewalk) and start tanting him. At first he tries to ignore it, but then i said something that really hit a nerve. He comes to me and swings, hitting me. I take out my gun and shoot him in self defense. Does my intention matter? The best predictor of future actions is most likely past actions. Unless you are professor X who can actually hear people's thoughts.

I'm not sure what your intent is with this line of reasoning (neither does it matter), but i hope you are not arguing for children to be held to the same standards as adults. The question with children is not about intention, but ability to reason. There is a reason why we have legal guardians make so many decisons on behalf of the child.

Children are a different matter. The argument was about intent as it partains to adults.

The problems with that argument are 1. How do you measure intentions 2. Does good inentions absolve you of your crime. I think these were Chomsky's points. On the first question, if we take the US governments word for it, should we also take everyone else's word for it? As Chomsky ppointed out, the Japanese claimed they wanted to create paradise on earth, which meant attacking the chinese. On the second question, even if we take their word for it, does that absolve them from the murders they committed? None of us would claim a bomber in the name of Allah should be forgiven because he had good inentions when killing apostates.

Not true. If you go to parts of the workd where people have strong cultural beliefs about certain groups of people,you see how culture influences economics.

Yea. I just take upb to mean reciprocity. If you want to do something, assume everyone else is allowed to do it.

Passive capturing sounds like eavesdroping or pointing a telescope at someone's window. I do not think those are immoral.

I assume its not immoral to put a sign saying all trespassers will be shot on site.

I see your point, but then we already have a credit score, its not that much worse to add a social score.

I think the logic behind Chomsky's position has to do with the meaning of voluntary interaction. Is someone who is starving or just needs to stay afloat another day rational enough to enter into contracts. Just think about people who go to loan sharks. The problem is that we don't know why people make bad decisions. It could be bad parenting or lack of self knowledge. All we know is that it has a negative impact on our lives if enough people support irrationality.

I would think being poor makes it more likely to resort to non-peaceful parenting. If you do not have the time to fully engage your kids because you have to work or do other things, you are more likely to resort to quick style (spanking, yelling) instead of more time consuming approaches. The second aspect is social conformity. Since most people in black communities believe in spare the rod and spoil the child, peaceful parenting is more likely to be rejected as bad parenting. Every time a child who is not spanked/beaten does something unpleasant, people will be likely to associate it with the "bad parenting" on the parents part, while no such claim is made for those who do beat their kids.