rosencrantz

Actually, John Locke came up with the concept of self ownership in his Second Treatise on Government. He also deducted the NAP from self ownership. Another route was taken by Hoppe who took the concept of Argumentation Ethics from the Frankfurt School and used it to justify the NAP as well. Finally, Kant argued for ethics to be universal and a priori true for it to be valid. Add those concepts and you essentially have UPB.

If you can stomach it, follow the story of Bushie, a typical White Low Church Christian and his everyday struggles. http://www.socialmatter.net/2016/05/11/weimerica-weekly-episode-24-a-weimerican-epic/ http://www.updateforever.ga/seasons.html

The one offered by Mensa is pretty solid. You can also pay a bit money and do the Stanford-Binet test which is usually administered by psychologists for a fee. They will also help you to interpret the results.

A similar argument is made by many Libertarians. And when you have a look at the discussion between Stef and Block it is hard to argue logically against it

You have to be selective when you want to summarize the history of Western Christianity in a few lines The reason for the Industrial Revolution is most likely high wages which lead to a process of automisation. The roots for Libertarianism are more Catholic than Protestant. After all, the Dominicans argued for no protective tariffs as early as the 13th century and Aquinas sought to limit the role of a king drastically. In Lutheran countries you had little choice but to go church and signal as a good Christian. The Lutheran Church used magistrates and police to enforce their doctrine in both theology and the way society was organised. I can't see how this is an improvement to say the Medieval Ages were you had a much larger market to choose from. Not to speak that you could be an agnostic as long as you didn't bother anyone.

Have you researched the refutations by physicists? Those make more sense to me.

Can you judge for yourself if Crother's points are valid?

The gist of the article is: The young lady was waiting for a sub at Vienna West Central. She got molested by one, told him to fuck off. He disappeared and returnded with three fellow Afghans. They groped her and stole her purse. When she was pushed down, she suffered an epileptic seizure. She commented that nobody of the bystanders came to her help. She was born in Dubai, her father is an Iraqi. She converted to Christianity. When she filed a charge at the police station, the police officer told her that women shouldn't be alone on the streets after 8 p.m. Edit: Police told her to color her hair differently and to wear less revealing clothes.

If there are no black holes, the x-ray flares are somewhat hard to explain.

A lack of B12 can cause mental problems. That is well established. But do all people with mental problems have a B12 deficiency? Can you point us to peer reviewed tests?

Quite the contrary. Marx(ists) and Anarchists were allied like cats and dogs. For more, see the exchange between Marx and Bakunin.

Having your friends nearby and having saved enough money that allows you to retreat from society.

Why?

What are your categories based on?

Doing a bit of research, I found this gem: Wouldn't it be hilarious if two of the main narratives of conspiracy theorists had been started by the KGB? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_measures

Regression to the mean in statistics is different from regression to the mean in genetics. In statistics, you have random not connected events. In genetics the events are random, but connected. Hence, you have to use a different methodology. http://statisticator.blogspot.de/2012/12/genetics-and-regression-toward-mean.html You can use both absolute numbers, or deviations from the mean. Deviations from the mean are simpler because they'll tell you instantly about the likelyhood of combined elements.

Regression to the mean is simple when you look at it the way it is supposed, from the perspective of standard deviation. Example 1: Height is 100% genetically determined. There is only one gene that determines height. Father: 4 deviations above the mean. Mother: 2 deviation avove the mean. The children of this couple are likely to be 3 deviations above the mean, they regress to the mean because of their mother. They will be taller than the rest of the population, but not as tall as their father. Example 2: Height is 80% genetically determined, 20% are enviroment. There is only one gene that determines height. Father: 4 deviations above the mean. Mother: 2 deviations above the mean. Because of the enviromental factor, the children will be taller than the mean with a range from 2,4 (hostile enviromental conditions) to 3,6 deviations above the mean (positive enviromental conditions). Because of genetic mixup, deviations from the mean are not transferred directly from father to offspring, rather you have a mix of both, mother and father that determine together with the enviroment where you will be on the bell curve. The regression to the mean comes into play, because 4 deviations away from the average is very rare, so it is likely that there will be a partner that isn't that far high. And that's regression to the mean.

Keep in mind that those first principles are a mental abstraction of the world, that is used by our brain to simplify the world and make it possible to act fast. When empirical facts collide with them, adjust your theory. Classical logic always makes true statements no matter the subject. All x are y P is x P is y Is always a true statement in logic, but it doesn't tell you if your premises are correct. 'All x are y' is subject to falsification at any time. All swans are white. That here is a swan. It is white. Is true in logic, but not in reality, since there are black swans.

There are opportunity costs to achieve that. The time you spend practicing martial arts can't be used for something else. If you have to fight against somebody who has no martial arts background, no knive, and no gun, a blue belt in Judo or Jiu Jitsu is probably more than enough. Grapplers can dictate the fight on their conditions. If there is more than one guy, if your opponent has a knive or if you feel panic RUUUUUUNNNNN and SCREEEEAAAAAM. The most effective martial arts is not to get involved in fights and to avoid dangerous situations.

The statement that Christianity values freedom more than Atheism is a bit absurd when you have a look on how Western Christian elites behaved throughout history. They were just as bad as the kings and queens of their time and there is no indication that any of them believed in what the Bible said. When Western Rome fell, the bishops took over the role of government from the Roman magistrates, doing more or less the same. When the Merovingians took over Western Europe, the bishops and the Pope more or less controlled them by making them believe they had superpowers given to them from god. During the Medieval Ages, they were involved in plots and subterfuge that makes Game of Thrones look like a docu from a kindergarten (the series Borgia is somewhat accurate in showing a typical Renaissance pope). After the refomration, the situation got much worse for people living in Protestant countries. The bishops used the power of the state to make people go to church and be good Christians. So where is this inherent love for freedom in Christianity? Looking at history I find the opposite, over and over again.

Perhaps the artists lose their inhibition and are more willing to share their experience? Also, the connection between drugs and music isn't that new. There were numerous opiate addicts among the classical composers (Berlioz and Chopin), various alcoholics (Bach, Beethoven, and Mozart), Wagner smoked a lot of week because of his 'migraine', and finally some bipolar people (Liszt, Bruckner, Smetana). Nietzsche provides a good distinction between Apollonian analytic culture and Dionysian ecstatic forms of expression. Music belong predominantly to the latter, it's not a big surprise that artists and composers use supplements to get into that state.

What other resources does Qatar have in terms of the BNP? If you combine the industrial output of the Arabian peninsula together, it's about the same size as Finland's economy. And Finland only produces tires and Angry Birds. Venezuela is the outlier due to the socialist nature of South America. The other exception where oil ressources didn't lead to a better living standard is the UK where the Northsea Oil was used to finance a housing bubble. The smart Europeans in Norway put the money in a fund. So the democracy is not the deciding factor. Rather, it's the genetic make up of South America. It doesn't, like a quick search would have shown you. Foreign workers constitute about 90% of all the people living in Qatar. Thus, their median income would directly be the national median income if they had been included in the statistics. If you invest 2 minutes of your time you would have noticed that the foreign worker's income is way below 25 000$. http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/soccer/international/qatar-construction-workers-earn-55c-an-hour-1.1881868 That article uses Qatari sources and says that each Nepali sends 2500$ in remittances. http://thinkprogress.org/immigration/2015/08/17/3692197/qatar-migrant-wages-wps/ From other sources we know that foreign workers send a lot of the money they earn back home, since this is the very reason they left their home country. This means, that they make about 5000$ yearly, if you use different countries with foreign workers as a model. If those numbers were included in median household income, the numbers would be drastically lower, no matter which source you use. Furthermore, these foreign workers are not Qatari citizens so their wages (if they are paid at all) aren't recorded in official documents until very recently (and under foreign pressure).

What did you forget that they have too? And despite all the oil and gas they have, their median household income (a better measure for wealth than average income) is between Belgium and Slovenia, two countries that have to actually get something done for their money.

There are three somewhat dependent factors that determine how well a society under any form of government will work: - IQ - Guilt or Shame culture - High or low trust society The least functional societies are low IQ,shame and low trust societies. The most succesful ones are high IQ, guilt driven and high trust societies. If a government is a democracy, a monarchy, a dictatorship, or a minarchist republic doesn't matter as much as the composition of the people being governed.

In the Marxist sense, Communism is not an ideology because require superstructures and different classes at odds with each other. Without superstructure and with no classes there cannot be an ideology in the Marxist sense. In the end of The Communist Manifesto, Marx describes his vision for the future. It seems that he assumes that the crash of capitalism and socialism left so many machines over that production will be plentiful. It a sense, it's a post scarcity world.