neeeel

Determinists dont claim that free will is magical. They claim that it doesnt exist. But you are saying that it does exist, but you dont know what it is?

What is it then?

I totally get the desire to have a quick easy solution, but for some reason I feel disturbed by this use of a lie. Perhaps thats more to do with me than the actual lie, I dont know. But the dishonesty , and glibness of it, rankles with me. Perhaps its because I can see, in my head, my parents say that sort of thing, and it made me want to vomit then.

this is a direct denial of reality, and your son would probably realise that. The fact is, that he is a big boy, and he is acting like that. For him, there is no dividing line between big boy behaviour, and baby behaviour. He is just following his instincts emotions and desires at any particular time. Who are you to set out reality and say x doesnt do y? Especially against direct evidence that x actually does do y? It is this sort of conflict between direct observable empirical evidence, and parental delusion, that is so confusing for children. What you should say, if you are honest, is " your behaviour makes me worried/uncomfortable, and I want you to stop" Its possible that, when he is "acting like a baby", he is looking to fulfil some need that wasnt fulfilled when he was actually a baby. I would guess that baby like behaviour is meant to trigger a response in the caregiver. Instead of trying to find out what he wants, you are basically saying "you are wrong for feeling/acting the way you are". This doesnt mean that I think we should just let kids stay in nappies and breast feed till they are 18 and leave the home. But getting away from the prescribed narrative of "big boys dont do things like that" is exactly the sort of thing that peaceful parenting is supposed to address

sure , but a mailbox isnt exactly property. Its an interface between your property and public property. Do you get to control what goes in and out of the mail box? doesnt make sense to me.

for this guy to think that putting a piece of paper in a mail box is a crime, something that impacts his life, is hilarious. He is so lost in delusion that nothing you say will get through. I dont see how what you did can be anything to do with morality.

If you give me £1000 now, I will give you £10,000,000 in 1 years time. So why arent you going to give me £1000? You are sacrificing hope. This doesnt make sense. Either you believe, in which case you already have that "hope", or you dont believe , in which case you cant just pretend to believe. It doesnt work like that.

What are your reasons for wanting to bring this up with your father? You say "I just want to hear what he has to say". Are you looking for an apology? an explanation of why he said it? Closure ( whatever that may mean in this situation)? Do you feel guilt? That it might actually be true that you caused your mothers stroke? I can certainly relate to how you feel about this, and how these things stick with you. My dad once said to me something along the lines of "I only have a short time left on this earth, and I dont want it spoiled and ruined by you" I can imagine that if you did bring this up with him, you might get accusations of being "insensitive" or "uncaring". That is not necessarily the case though. I dont think the situation automatically rules out that you cant talk with your father empathetically and with curiosity. How likely are you to get an honest conversation with him?

Thanks for responding joel. I found your video interesting I think that I may at times be communicating non=verbally that I am upset, in order to change the behaviour or perceptions of others,so it is something for me to watch out for.

Is feeling sad, and showing sadness, about something that happened or something that someone did, emotional manipulation? Because I think I do that, although I guess its possible that I am faking sadness in order to induce guilt.

You might need to start with a definition of virtue and virtuous Isnt this just utilitarianism in disguise? What do you mean by "furthers mans life"? Stef says at the beginning of UPB

you didnt pick them maybe, but someone did. There is absolutely no justification for using 3 , 7, or 11 anywhere in your post

at some point, in the past, and in the future, the sun and moon wouldnt appear the same size. Its like the saying of a broken clock being right twice a day You say that of course it matters if they are a km off. Instead of being whole numbers and looking impressive, your calculations are fractions , and just look meaningless. Its also interesting that you picked 3 , 7, and 11, for no reason that I can see ( they are lucas numbers,whoopee, so what, thats no reason to pick those 3 specific numbers) . So your calculations are all weighted by deliberate selection of numbers at the beginning of the process, in order to get the results you see.

I have noticed this too. the thing is, just because this is a philosophy board, there is no reason to believe that the humans that visit this board will be fundamentally different from humans who congregate in any other groups. yes, on average we may be slightly more self aware, but in general we are still emotional, belief driven, needy, egoic, delusional people. I would guess that most people ( and I include myself in this) have an inflated view of where they are actually at with regards to self development and self awareness. The ones who actually have gotten far, and are very self aware and together, probably dont feel the need to go to FDR meetups. So, perhaps its your expectations of what the FDR meetup would be like that let you down, rather than the people?

Hi, its not clear to me what you mean by, for example "summersaulting" or "reaching personal equilibrium" Your post is very general, and very vague, non specific. Would you be able to give a bit more detail on what is bothering you?

this made me want to throw up. The whole facebook page stinks of shit....

"animals cannot think as moral agents" is a fact, yes. "animals cannot think as moral agents, therefore its ok to eat them" is an opinion, and the conclusion in no way follows from the premises. But perhaps thats not what you are saying? I am maybe misunderstanding what your point is.

But your prinicple seems to be "They dont think at that level, therefore its ok to eat them" I dont think you can derive some sort of conclusion from "They dont think at that level". And, if you do, then the conclusion applies to all things that cant think at that level. Otherwise, there is some other hidden premise that is being used to derive the conclusion.

It appears that most humans simply cannot and will not think at this kind of level. Does that mean we can eat them?

but you have no free will, and you are still discussing it?

hahaha, good one. perhaps I have no free will to not discuss it?

Cows make choices too, or appear to. We dont have agency or free will, therefore you are correct, morality, contracts , and freedom are illusions. But thats a hefty thread derail I guess.

I see open minded as having the ability to look at all your beliefs dispassionately and openly, and be willing to find out that they are false. Even the seemingly obvious and true ones. Humans as a rule dont like having their core beliefs challenged. This is not the same as accepting all ideas or perspectives as equally valid.

Hey, I listened to your call in with stef. There was a lot of detail there that didnt really come across in the posts. And it seems like what I said in the thread is not very relevant. just wanted to say it sounds like you went through a tough time, and a confusing time, I hope you get things back on track.

I think it would also be interesting to look at WHY these things are virtuous?