Jakethehuman

And they are both fat, what is going on.

Deadset smartest guy in the universe believes in God. Whyyyyy

Hey just in a bit of a weird situation. I've been kicked from the closed fdr Facebook group, presumably for making un-PC comments about a trans guy. The comments were: someone referred to him as "mrs" so I replied "mrs *smiley face*, next someone asked about fertility and the OP replied "why would being trans effect fertility" I commented "*man* *scissors* *dancing woman*" and next, in response to a comment by op saying how happy he is when he presents a certain way, I replied "cut off your penis and everlasting happiness will surely ensue" I know these aren't arguments but they are meant to be jokes, I think they are funny. The reason for the OP was Gavin McInnes said trans are mentally ill gays and Stef didn't challenge him on it. I think the op is concern trolling and being a classic sjw trying to be a victim. Many people on the thread supported Gavin's claim and provided proofs. I make some jokes and get blocked, this is meant to be an fdr page but they are pushing LGBT PC crap and blocking people? My question is wtf is wrong with admins or alternatively, wtf is wrong with me? (Sorry the forum won't let me post emojis)

Yes I did, however I understand that others can have insights that might change my mind or help me understand better, do you have any or just here to analyse?

It only matters if we are going to do group therapy for them right here on this thread, that was not the point. I should have just asked is it ok to travel alone while in a relationship without the personal story, sorry about that! I think the answer is no because you should want to share every experience that you can with your partner, and if you are going outside of the relationship to get some need fulfilled you will drift apart. Any learning or growing should be share. Most of us have to spend enough time apart during the day at work, why would you want to spend leisure time apart, especially with kids in the mix? Most importantly what exactly will you get out of travelling alone that it is impossible to get travelling together? I am just after some thoughts on whether it can be ok and if so what reasons do you have?

Thank you for your reply and thoughts Mrcapitalism. I agree and after raising my initial concerns with her I have since accepted her decision, I just hope kids don't end up getting hurt but there's nothing more I can do.

I've asked for you opinion on a certain definite question, not a personality test, get a grip mate. Sounds like you are incompatible. Find someone interesting.

Lol wtf I try and make the post simple so people don't have to read an essay and get accused of looking for ammo... I think it's a very simple question, there is a principle involved who cares about all the other bullshit? She is my girlfriends friend, they recently met online and we share many of the same views, my girl is very excited to find someone to get along with. He is a chiropractor (red flag for me lol), he's from Syria but has a Christian and an atheist for parents, he had a messy breakup with someone he describes as a psycopath, he felt sorry for her and let her move in next door with his sister, then he proposed to her after they'd broken up she said no and he says now that he wouldn't have followed through it was just a bad phase, 2.5 years later she still lives there. They are talking about kids and a life together, yet they don't live together, as his parents live with him so it will be a couple of years before they will be able to put their relationship to the domestic test. During the initial stages of their relationship he would "test" Her by starting fights or not talking to her for extended periods just to make sure "she wasn't a psycho". He has stopped doing that now after she made it clear she didn't like it. He says he is a very different person to who he was when he dated that last woman. She broke up with him once because he's Syrian and she wants to mate with white genes because she's worried about whites dying out or whatever, but he fought for her and now she very much in love with him. She has said the main thing she cares about is whether a man can provide for a family. She says he interacts well with her and others and always puts the people he cares about before himself. She at first didn't like the idea of the solo holidays but after talking to him, she doesn't care if she stays at home with kids while he has fun and is sure it would be good for them all. This is my point all of the above shit doesn't matter at all, he needs to explain what exactly he gets out of a solo holiday (with strangers) that he can't get with her there, because obviously she would prefer to be there so he has to have a really good reason why she shouldn't be, personal growth and development is bs just words.

He says he needs that time alone to grow mentally and be a better father, and if it is good for him it will be good for the family. To be clear it's not really time alone as he will be holidaying having fun and socialising with strangers.

Yes that's right, two weeks a year, at least, after they have kids.

Hey I wonder if I could get some opinions on a situation someone I know is in right now, should be quick: She is getting serious with a guy, talking about kids etc, but he wants to go on holidays alone, about 50/50 before they have kids, and then two weeks a year once they are married with kids. My gut tells me this is really wrong and she should not accept it, but she says not a problem for her, while also saying she would love to go with him, he's got heaps of dough so I think she isn't being objective. What do you guys think?

Hi this is just a quick request and invitation for people to go and check out a page on facebook I have just created. It is called Fundamental Human Action, and the focus will be on UPB, NAP, austrian econ, free market, basically just rational approaches and ideas that we all share and things I think are principles that need to be applied for us to graduate out of the philosophical and ethical quagmire that we are stuck in. There is a link here https://www.facebook.com/Morpheusyourshackles/ Hopefully I will see a few of you over there

Pretty sure it's the comets.

Nice article, shared on fb.

I think everyone should know how to throw a punch

"free from any vicissitude not of its own making" Here he is saying that a philosophical mind can shed the weight of deterministic experience? "They are compatable in the sense that freedom of becoming is embodied, yet incompatible in the sense that the freedom of becoming cannot be explained by its embodiment" Is he saying that freedom is seen in the choices we make, yet we can't use these choices as evidence for freedom because choices aren't always a result of a free mind? So I feel like he is trying to say being free can only be a result of philosophical thought, which is like you say Kantian in origin, because Philosophy is Truth, as solid as 193+11=204. So if we follow these principles we only have one real choice.

I'm not trying to prove anything explicitly, just expanding the discussion. If our brain is just a highly advanced computer, then all of our decisions are the result of detectable and traceable stimuli, I don't think there is any argument about that. (I just had a thought that I would love to see what Logic looks like in the brain) Is there such a thing as a decision that does not have a logical answer? Take a persons favourite fruit for instance. If someone has developed an attachment to a particular fruit there are probably a few factors involved, firstly they may have been exposed more to that fruit than any other growing up, secondly their taste buds might be more receptive to the flavours, maybe they like messy fruit, maybe they saw an ad that said it was a really healthy fruit. There wasn't a single choice here. Every step of the way the environment impacted the person physically to the point where if a detector was placed in the brain of a person while they ate a variety of fruits, it could tell us what their favourite fruit is, before they said it, perhaps even before they recognise it themselves. Now you can "choose" to say some other fruit is actually your favourite, but if it isn't then you are either so lacking in self knowledge that you can't make such a simple statement about yourself, or you are being totally random. So does free will only give us the choice between logic and randomness?

Let's take a fairly relatable example: One of your good friends has been offered a better job on the other side of the country, he has lived in a small town all his life and would be leaving his entire social network, however the job is really well paying. He's always been very goal oriented but loves his family is very much. There are three options here: 1he could take the job. 2 he could keep his current job. 3 something totally random. For rational people option 3 is not really an option. So we are left with 2 choices, reason tells us this cannot possibly be a 50/50 situation. With your knowledge of the persons history and personality, the current events in his life, if you are interested in the outcome and spend some time thinking about it you should be able to predict to a high degree of certainty what his choice will be. Now consider a computer that had access to all of his history, experience, thoughts and feelings, would not this machine be able to predict within a 99% certainty?

I have not read Kant but that sounds like what I was thinking, although I'm not sure anymore. So it is still Free will because cause does not = compulsion, ie the cause of my not hurting people is because of the NAP, Golden Rule etc but I still decided to choose the moral path? Somewhere in the brain all of the stimuli (yes including ideas) get jumbled together and at some point we get to decide. It seems that if you don't believe in anything supernatural, with a sufficiently advanced technology every neural network of the brain could be mapped and tracked, every experience and variable could be taken into account and a computer will tell you what decisions a person is going to make. Since nature has created the brain, and not some divine being, given enough time I'm sure we can make a perfect copy of it. This means we either find the "choice center" and discover how we are able to make contradictory decisions, or else we see that despite the incredible complexity we are just a result of traceable and predictable biochemical reactions. Even if we aren't responsible for our actions a society that let people off the hook would end up changing the environment in such a way as to make more people "choose" the wrong path. I think it is likely that there is something in the brain that enables us to go against the grain of our entire experience and do something a computer wouldn't predict. This could just be my ego wanting to have ownership of itself. No I don't want you to spend too much time on it, I have a lot more reading to do, only respond if you really want to!

I should also ask what are your views on the subject?

Thanks you helped a lot! You don't think I was on the right track at all? Well I find it hard to imagine that things can exist without a cause, maybe I still don't understand, free will is the exercise of certain parts of the brain, real physical processes. Free will is just being able to make decisions for yourself, if all of your decisions are based on two main things, prior experience and conscious thought, it seems to follow that the cause of your decisions are, either unthinking reaction to stimuli flavoured by prejudice, or the adherence to logical thought, which must be everywhere the same, because you can't have two logical (correct) and differing opinions on the one problem. I'm not a determinist btw just intrigued by this stuff all of a sudden.

Good girl for reading nietzsche, Bad girl for being so into boys at 16 years old. If you're into philosophy and have been watching Stefan for a while it should be impossible to "fall in love" with an unlovable person ie a person that would hurt you, so I suspect that what you felt was not love but childish lust and infatuation, which is notorious at your age, that along with a deterministic streak is apparently quite depressing. The only use you could have of "willing your will" would be to remove the annoying tugs of lust, gluttony etc (innate desire) and be 100% at peace 100% of the time with the decisions and behaviours you are engaging in. If you are rational and mindful you are going to make the correct decisions despite what your animal brain wants, so the "will" actually has no bearing on the physical world (outside of annoying biochemical reactions in the brain). I know as a vegan that the annoying biochemical reactions in the brain eventually fade away to the point where the things you previously craved for can now become repulsive. It is the same as going out for a night drinking, the idea repulses me because of all the implications, and I have decided that other things are more important. The desire to ride motorbikes dangerously fast has gone because of rational thought, mindfulness, and other things in my life that have destroyed that desire for risk. The animal desire to conserve energy and sit around has been destroyed by the need to be fit and healthy for as long as possible. The same can be said of the application of mental exertion and the daily decision to improve it. The list goes on.

This was tough to read so not sure I really got it, looking for some help! I think the point is that we need more than just physical freedom to be truly free. This is something Stef has talked about a little bit, the idea that when people aren't utilising their conscious rational minds to make important decisions in life, they are living close to a deterministic life. When someone has bad genes, and bad parents/ early environment they are as close to real determinism as possible. So to be truly free you have to rid yourself of the trauma and dysfunction everyone has, and be mindful of all of your thoughts and behaviours. I agree 99%, however this seems to imply that one can never be 100% free because, it would seem to me, it is impossible to be 100% released from some of the negative biases and behaviours instilled in our early development, and if there are any behaviours of which our conscious thinking brain is not the sole determinator of, we aren't completely free. PiP 24 Jun.pdf

It's a shame this post has died because there are quite a few unanswered arguments on my behalf, especially when I took the time to respond to all the opposing arguments with research and reason.