Boss

1. "Determinism is defined as a lack of the ability have chosen differently" To claim people lack the ability to have chosen differently is to claim to have known the choice of the person. Like if I claimed people are not able to choose differently from Coca-Cola or Pepsi, then I would put my money where my mouth is and play the market solely on "determinism" outcome. But the reality is people choose differently so the market is not a determined outcome. It reminds me of the phrase when someone tells you "You have no choice in this matter" it means the person saying that already knows the choice. And normally enacts it by force 2. "determinism is also defined as the lack of choice" You are making a decision when faced with the possibility of replying or not replying to this post. Which are two choices Stefan has imo a slippery slope, claiming some people are "stripped of free will" I say maybe if they are unconscious. Other than that I strongly disagree with the idea of someone being stripped of free will. Everyone reading this made the choice to do so, And everyone reading this will make a choice on what to do after reading this.

This is my current understanding. The NAP is the argument that the initiation of force(meaning to make someone do something against their will) is immoral. It is proven through UPB. 1,2,3. It was individuals who violated the NAP 4. Anyone who wants to be moral can live to the NAP 5. Not sure what you mean exactly with civil dual. If it involves making someone do something against their will then it is immoral 6. Yes, For example, verbal threats while flashing his gun on his waist 7. someone who initiates the use of force daily is only further validating their immoral ways. 8. "accidentally steps on land" doesn't grant someone the right to shoot them. Just like how someone accidentally stepping on your toes wouldn't. However, If someone grabs you against your will and start stomping on your toes legs body head whatever, and the way to get away is to shoot the person. You should stop their immoral behavior by shooting the person 9. As soon as that child is consciously able to initiate the use of force. 10. If someone cuts off your finger, they have violated the NAP and is immoral. Cutting off a finger is taking away the person's physical property. Thus, I believe he can take the person's property to mitigate some of the damages done. My question to you is What do you feel "works in philosophy, may not work in real life"? what got you into wanting to learn about the NAP and the initiation of force and to ask these questions? Thanks for the questions btw I love testing my current understandings

I think the issue was our ideas of the outcome of a beating I try to stick to outcomes that are 100% the case. So like the obvious outcome of a beating is physical pain/injury and obviously, you can't choose to not have physical pain/injury after a beating. I do believe that the person can choose to beat or not beat someone tho, through free will I wasn't sure of your idea of the outcome of a beaten. Judging by stef statement he believes determinism can be the outcome. I still disagree with that statement.

No person can choose the outcomes of having been beaten. Every person chooses to beat or not beat someone. Maybe you can say what you're saying in another way so I can understand? sorry. Like what outcome are you referring too? determinism? physical injury?

No, you are not following, Of course, a person can't choose to have been beaten. This is not MMA or boxing. I am saying every person who was beaten(unless they were physically beaten 24/7) were also at times not beaten right? So they have the history of both being beaten and not being beaten. Does that make sense?

Well, It's hard to give an example as I feel this is a complex issue and maybe the example I or you talk about won't be 100% related to all other cases. I can try to tho. Like when the abuse occurred, abuse also did not occur prior to the event. Like if someone got spanked with a belt, it's not a 24/7 event. So they have the history of not getting spanked with the belt too. So the individual has the history of both abuse and not abuse. Thus when they get older they have the history and free will to choose what they want to do. Well, I don't think ideas are a biological inevitably like farting. I think Ideas are something someone chooses through free will. Like I gathered your ideas because I choose to check the FDR board. I also had the idea of not checking the board so I could have done that too. Farting, on the other hand, didn't have much of a choice. I guess you can choose to not eat beans lol

Hello Barnsley, Peaceful parenting is 100% true. I'm not too well versed in the "photocopier effect". My first objection to that phrase is since everyone has histories of everything that happened to them also not happening, why is the event of it not happening not taken into account? For evil to exist, good must also exist. For every action taken, before that action, there was no action. "Enough unprocessed suffering has the tendency to make a person immune to healing / mourning / curiosity" How do you quantify what is enough? I think this is a slippery slope.

"enough trauma can, I believe, strip people of free will" Only if the trauma made them brain dead, which would make them incapable of anything. Anyone who can, also can not. The majority of people live their lives not doing. They all know what not doing is like. When people do anything it is a free choice as they could have continued doing nothing. Anyone know when Stefan developed or found this idea? At face value, I disagree with it pretty strongly but want to learn more about it.

You know when you claim someone is "no longer bringing philosophy to the world" that implies you know what philosophy is. When you claim someone is bringing "more propaganda" that says you know what the propaganda is. so bring the philosophy and call out the propaganda, but start with an actual argument this time, instead of the incoherent statement you originally posted. Also, Trump is not pumping up the stock market bubble lol, the stock market has been going up even under Obama. It's because of the FED low-interest rate. It's basically free money. Of course, the stock market keeps going up. The solution is still the same: END THE FED TAXATION IS THEFT #FreeCryptocurrency The FCC net neutrality is rumored to stop Crypto. Stefan doesn't deal with rumors tho so not sure if he will mention that.

Willpower requires conscientiousness because you will understand why you should do something or if you should restrain impulses. In order to possess willpower, it's greatly beneficial to be virtuous, free, truthful and courageous

"The question I guess is is it ok to just do it for the money?" Well, I wouldn't say you are doing it just for the money, Money is more like a tool, its used to get something done. What you want to be done is more important than the money. Like If the goal is to build a house, I may need some tools but im not getting the tools just for the tools, I'm getting the tools to build a house. So I wouldn't say you are just doing it just for the money, but rather doing it for as you said "I'd like to be in the position where I'm able to support a wife and kids, earning enough money to have a comfortable lifestyle, being able to afford top medical care for myself and my family etc" As far as career choices, sure you can change. But if its just for more money I don't think that is needed. Have you tried expanding your music teaching with online music courses to reach more people? I don't know much about music teaching but I did a quick search and found this person who sold this course teaching piano which has over 85k people enrolled. He made well over a million dollars for sure. https://www.udemy.com/pianoforall-incredible-new-way-to-learn-piano-keyboard/ If you have any free time you can try that out. I am a retired entrepreneur and have coached many people so I have a pretty bias way of thinking. But I believe you can become a millionaire selling almost anything. There is a famous story of a guy becoming a millionaire selling pet rocks lol that is an extreme case, but, if you are a good music teacher, you can at the very least make a comfortable income selling your music teachings.

Well, I think if the migrants are Muslims, they have the highest fertility rate, an average of 3.1 children per woman. So that may be one migrant crisis wave incoming for Europe. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_population_growth

From what I understand according to the research, the best situation for the children is for them to have both biological parents raising them. I haven't seen much research on polyamory, but I believe it includes other partners which are not the biological parent so that may be an issue.

He who has a why to live can bear almost any how. - Friedrich Nietzsche Maybe instead of "Just do it" you can ask "Why do it?" getting motivated/inspired from the internal has always been better than anything external in my experience.

I don't consider crypto or precious metals an investment, I consider it insurance for when fiat fails(every fiat currency in history has failed). You can now read about case studies on how bitcoin is used in such scenario https://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2017/02/03/why-venezuelas-currency-crisis-is-a-case-study-for-bitcoin/#674b15ce19b2 https://sg.news.yahoo.com/venezuelans-bitcoin-mining-escape-inflation-020507908.html https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitcoin-exchange-localbitcoins-posts-fourfold-trading-volume-increase-in-venezuela And because I consider it insurance, I have never sold any or cared about price. Most hedge fund managers recommend 5-10% of your portfolio on gold if you want to hedge against inflation, I did 5% on bitcoin and 2.5% each for silver and gold(however even tho bitcoin has now grown to a larger amount of my portfolio I still haven't sold any). I have a few business friends that have different strategies of how they buy 1. Has bought years ago like I did, but cashed out his original investment so all that is left is pure "profit" 2. Has been spending 5-10% of his monthly paycheck to buy crypto every month 3. Has been buying more every time crypto has "crashed" according to the mainstream They all have different reasoning for their strategy. I think it comes down to your financial situation and how you see crypto and how you see risk.

Top billionaire investors like Ray Dalio and Geroge Soros are buying gold. The .1% rich are hoarding right now because they know things will crash and possibly collapse soon. They will probably buy/spend when things crash as things will be cheaper. At least that is my interpretation of the situation

This is not a claim, this is biology. The individual is divided on the basis of their reproductive functions because biological humans can procreate(have sex) and for that to happen the sex of the human matters. What doesnt matter, is your claim of examples "Differences in vision, social preferences, fat distribution, skin thickness, bone structure, brain structure, emotional response, musculature, on and on." These are all inconsistent, while the actual biology of sex is not. Why don't your examples matter? because on a biological level humans can have sex based on their sex to continue their biology. And none of your examples are needed on a biological level to do so. Unlike my consistent examples of XY Chromosome, uterus, ovaries, vagina, etc it seems you dont understand biological consistency. Sex needs consistency on a biological level for it to happen. Judging from your response to the study and the examples you provided you dont understand that at all. Which might explain as you stated, the "level of disconnect" in this conversation. Anyways no point in continuing to reply in this format if our conversation is disconnected. If you want to try instant chat on discords we can. nonetheless, I wish you well on your journey to truth

Well, from what I understand, he supports mainly democratic causes. https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/about/expenditures I think the thing that got the most headlines was the millions he gave to Hillary Clinton and refugees/migrants causes

None of the studies you linked had any biological conclusions. They both are looking at relations to "gender identity" which has nothing to do with biology. As I stated in my first post, There is no such thing as Transgenderism. Everyone has biological characteristics of both sexes as I explained with both having arms, legs, eyes etc. When it comes to which sex an individual is we must understand what sex is, sex is the division of humans on the basis of their reproductive functions. Biology shows these distinct characteristics in the form of XY Chromosome, uterus, ovaries, vagina, etc. So the biology of their reproductive functions will ultimately decide on the sex of an individual.

consistent would mean unchanging in nature. Like XY Chromosome, uterus, ovaries, vagina etc It seems those studies you linked focus more on feeling rather than biology. As stated "Transsexuals have the strong feeling" "Transsexuals experience themselves as being of the opposite sex, despite having the biological characteristics of one sex" Anyways if you agree with these studies its clear to me where you fall, You have more biological characteristic(s) of one sex, and the "feeling" of another. Biology/truth/science is consistent. Feelings are not. So there is no point in claiming to be something as the biology is set.

yea I dont watch many of the newer movies as most are done by Democrats promoting leftism. Maybe we can make a list of good movies? I can start with the obvious atlas shrugged

Could you link me evidence about the brain and "physical, observable female biology inside" most brain work I have seen is inconsistent which would mean invalid for truth. Also, there is neuroplasticity which means changes can naturally occur. As far as which traits I chose, whichever is consistent and true. I would be surprised If I didn't miss a lot of other true consistent biological traits. if so please share the biological traits as it will help with my main point. My main point is to point out truthful distinctions. Then one can say from looking at their biological makeup that they fall more into either male/female biology. As male and female both share some of the same biologies(like they both have arms, legs, etc) what separates us are the truthful biological distinctions.

Yea I believe you should reread my original post. I stated and provided an example of how people can conceptualize and define terms. I also stated "the biological differences are what matters, rather than the conceptualizing part" "transgenderism, it doesn't exist. What actually exists is the biological differences between the sexes like as you stated XY Chromosomes. There is also the biological differences that allow pregnancy, breastfeeding, periods, genitalia" Also to take it one level deeper to provide a better understanding. It's not about biological differences, it's about truth. Its just that biological differences provide truth. and concepts/opinions/categories do not. Like people can call others a boy, a girl or transgender based on their opinions. People cant be called to have XX Chromosome, uterus, ovaries, periods or having a vagina, etc as this actually involves truth as in looking at cells, not concepts/opinions/categories I dont know much about transgenderism but I am willing to chat about it more to learn. Are you familiar with the FDR discords group? I feel instant text message would be better than waiting for post replies.