Magnetic Synthesizer

I second this. Virtuous/valuable behavior has a biological component when it comes to living beings. Given a moral standard, It is improbable that all compare equally against it.

The first reason is I'm still not far from the null zone. I am trying to find positive relationships. I will also hold a meetup in my area. The other reason is I like to change the world through the establishment of organizations/action groups and expand their reach. I believe those are the true reasons for this endeavor. As for the first reason, I think setting meetups in my area will yield results illuminating towards that direction.

I spent a year around that area. I understood these things were possible because of people's behavior. One ironic part is that they won't believe it is possible while they are enablers and justify the impossibility by arguing with disabling behavior (which they clearly don't have). That's how I found Stefan Molyneux, the way I see it and agree with you, is that once you know there's a problem, any addition of time is worth spent on the solution and that's what Freedomain Radio is.

You don't have to download anything. It has a low (time) cost of entry . https://discord.gg/vPFuXB6 Multi-channel live chat. Multi-channel live voice chat. Your own off-server contact list and private messages and voice. Other servers easily accessible from the same platform (discord). Backup link: https://discord.gg/5sj26B9 edit: separate link for inflow statistics specific to here.

Looking for the call-in show with ''we're in a situation where we are led to compromise on our ideals'' Incredible. I lost track of it! I wanted to listen to it today but did not find it. I thought it was the red pill wife recent one...but no.. or is it further in?

What caused a decline in birthrates? Black widows and company is my guess.

Especially the slides from this video: The Bomb in the Brain_ Brain Development and Violence with Stefan Molyneux, since it has the staggering stats on corporal punishment and child dislike. I searched the forum in content section but was unable to find the content. Please help me find them. I want to be able to refer back to them both for myself and others without having to search for their place in the videos and also to copy-paste the information in my notes.

I think there are already plenty. You can still find a niche with these things. It does not tend to monpoly but it could be considered like an oligopoly instead of a fully distributed market. My advice: Try multiple avenues first and then switch all ressources to whichever picks up. /advice from Charisma On command

https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/4gilzl/spanking_children_increases_the_likelihood_of/ What would be the content to present? If you know then please do so. Could save some children. I posted SM's playlist on parenting. spanking study on the front page

https://www.google.ca/search?q=standard&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&gws_rd=cr&ei=CdEcV8iiNIPn-AHQ_JTwBg#q=standard+definition Besides having no defects, are there higher standards of quality of offspring that can be achieved by fertility alone?

''So women in this society will be attracted to moral men and will consider immoral men to be losers.'' I don't think tingle generator is as flexible. But I still got a lot of data to go through.

How does fertility affect offspring quality? But I'm unsure if there's a varying degree of quality depending on the women's fertility or if it simply means that fertility lowers the chances of miscarriage and birth defects. Here's what I think I know: 1.There is a standard quality of offspring with no problems that is not difficult to achieve. 2. Besides the offspring having no problems, there isn't any better quality. I researched a few times and have found ambiguous mentions that fertility affect offspring quality. But I'm unsure if there's a varying degree of quality depending on the women's fertility or if it simply means that fertility lowers the chances of miscarriage and birth defects.

I meant my reply to your thread. I realized you could have interpreted ''it'' as referring to the link. Let me know if that happened. Relevant part of my comment: ''let me know if you got anything from my reply'' I didn't mean you read the whole article. I just dug up something to convince you and others that deep learning logic is a real thing, not just an idea.

In regards to intuition, it is deep learning. Check out the epistemological methods higher-level-learning-AIs have. its simply, theory weighted and selected against experience and theory derived from experience. All you need is creativity and you may end up with the philosophical capacity of a human! There are two sources of intuition: neural circuits hardwired from DNA and refined by millions of years of evolution. An example would be the intuition to interpret physical cues in other humans. The other is what you come up with with the immense parallel processing power of your subconcious. As for paranoia, it might stem from confusion. If you take in a lot of world-view changing information for the first time in a subject, don't worry about being overwhelmed. My mind distills it without me even having to think about it. The data epistemology and components are distilled, independent theories are distilled, complete consistent world hypothesizes are attempted. Maybe if you don't verify the course of processing with your conscious seat of rationality as in the above quote, you could go crazy. If your not sure if you're crazy or if the others are, defer to universal consistency and empiricism. I suggest doing decisive distillation if you find yourself in a fog of probability (which only happens to newbs I think). After a year, I can eloquently speak of it. Remember, most of your knowledge comes through other humans. ''she said, he said'' is a sorry and hypocritical excuse to ignore valuable information. Whatever comes up from deep learning ends up being rationalized and rationalizations end up going getting refined through deep learning. I dug up a link for you: http://www.wired.com/2016/01/microsoft-neural-net-shows-deep-learning-can-get-way-deeper/ Hope this helps. Let me know if you got anything from my reply. If you observe your development is exponential year-by-year, I can relate. It seems a surprising and unsustainable trend. Yet, it keeps going. Don't expect everyone around you to follow.

If researchers failed to find genetic markers to account for discrepancies in intelligence (besides disorders like down syndrome) and if there is no strong evidence that it is the result of a consortium of genes, then it would be worthy to look into epigenetics. In other words, it would be worthy to also control for the expression of genes and familial history that could influence it. This raises the question: does the environment explain a population's intelligence? Do lower IQ people who immigrate in higher IQ nations, have their intelligence increase down the generations significantly? If not, Are their long lasting differences on how the epigenetics of an individual behave and react Now hopeful someone in the field sees this and weighs in.

I'd like to add a perspetive. We have tried economic anarchy. Satisfied so far.

Then the sim will have to sim our sims. Gets expensive.

I used to have resentment for the masses (brief due to my frenetic evolution). The solution wasn't obvious. I knew it was caused by a few rationalization.I debunked them away from my core morality. I didn't commit time, cured it passively with periodic short progress/trials. I think this is caused by unconsistencies in morality and natural evolutionary reactions. I could give you many tricks, but I choose to give you 1 best trick, I think is rare. If you can't find the full origin of sometimes of your self such as an emotion: 1. Look at what desires the emotion causes. 2.The desires are closely related with an imagined cure. 3. What does the cure remedy? 4. The cure remedies the cause of your emotion. 5. Now you know the some or all cause of your emotion. Negative emotions are nearly always undesirable. Emerge from internal errors or outside trauma.

Disconnected sadists. Their pleasur ein yoru suffering might not be it or be secondary. I would attribute it to power-play entertainement or status or coping with their own insecurities. Not an expert in this.

He made that up is what your thinking?

https://www.facebook.com/Official.Freedomain.Radio/photos/a.10151448472249183.507474.18322869182/10153667063929183/?type=3 ''But Jake couldn't consent too, so then they mutually raped each other.'' ''2 people cannot rape eachother at the same time, aaarrgh! this logic...'' 1. Consent while drunk is invalid 2. Sex without a party's valid consent is rape 3. Both are drunk 4. Neither can consent. 5. They are raping each other. Does rape require consent of the rapist?

Well, I did think. Just not a lot. I still think that it gives more opportunity for over-reaction. Since not only the attacked party can over-react, but eveyrone in the world can. I believe an over-reaction in self-defense is always justifiable under universal principles. I project that onto over-reaciton in defence of others and feel it is too severe. A situation could escalate and involve many people at the slightest misunderstanding or disagreement. Like if you mistake who initiated force. I don't run like this in my morality. It's not a personal moral question. It's rather a social question, how would people think and what the dynamic would be. That is outside the scope of our present world. No ancap around.

X, the other violant party, is not being attacked.

Well X is not threathened, he is not defending himself.

It is not in self-defence, but in defence of another.