RichardY

"Betrayal of Robert the Bruce" - Braveheart. Thought some of of the symbology was poignant. Not sure really how to put it, but have felt a degree of power from those who, actually have a heart or some belief system, even if they are devout christian. "Lands, Titles, Men, Power, Nothing" - Braveheart Scottish Thistle moto "No one provoke me with impunity".

Hey if its free stuff, its free stuff. But yeah if there's strings attached or more trouble than its worth, I'm not interested right? I can go months probably years without seeing a single soul and being unphased. I think it's a trait present in many Northern Europeans. Ecclesiastes 4 So I returned, and considered all the oppressions that are done under the sun: and behold the tears of such as were oppressed, and they had no comforter; and on the side of their oppressors there was power; but they had no comforter. 2 Wherefore I praised the dead which are already dead more than the living which are yet alive. 3 Yea, better is he than both they, which hath not yet been, who hath not seen the evil work that is done under the sun. 4 Again, I considered all travail, and every right work, that for this a man is envied of his neighbour. This is also vanity and vexation of spirit. 5 The fool foldeth his hands together, and eateth his own flesh. 6 Better is an handful with quietness, than both the hands full with travail and vexation of spirit. 7 Then I returned, and I saw vanity under the sun. 8 There is one alone, and there is not a second; yea, he hath neither child nor brother: yet is there no end of all his labour; neither is his eye satisfied with riches; neither saith he, For whom do I labour, and bereave my soul of good? This is also vanity, yea, it is a sore travail. 9 Two are better than one; because they have a good reward for their labour. 10 For if they fall, the one will lift up his fellow: but woe to him that is alone when he falleth; for he hath not another to help him up. 11 Again, if two lie together, then they have heat: but how can one be warm alone?

@smarterthanone Feeding the bear, more to do with the corruption of environmental resources and lifeforms. A kind of "Prime Directive" Or feeding kids cheesecake, so they end up obese. Perhaps more of an ownership problem. Was seeing if I could figure out some other moral principle than just the NAP. But as you have pointed out to think of the NAP as anything other than a moral principle, in situations of duress is not viable. (train track scenario). So what causes the breakdown of morality? The intiation of force. But what causes the intiation of force/violence? The biological imperative to survive in whatever form? Some kind of scene from the movie SAW? ------------- EARLY ENGLISH STRATEGY: SLAUGHTER When Edward III led his first raids into France, he was not aiming to take and hold a series of strongpoints and regions. Instead the English led raid after raid called a ‘chevauchée’. These were missions of pure murder, designed to devastate a region by killing crops, animals, people and destroying buildings, windmills and other structures. Churches and people were plundered then put to the sword and fire. Huge numbers died as a result, and wide areas became depopulated. The aim was to cause such damage that the French wouldn’t have as many resources, and would be forced to negotiate or give battle to stop things. The English did take important sites in Edward’s era, such as Calais, and small lords fought a constant battle against rivals for land, but the strategy of Edward III and leading nobles was dominated by chevauchées ----------- But who shall dwell in these worlds if they be inhabited?… Are we or they Lords of the World?… And how are all things made for man?— Kepler (quoted in The Anatomy of Melancholy) No one would have believed in the last years of the nineteenth century that this world was being watched keenly and closely by intelligences greater than man's and yet as mortal as his own; that as men busied themselves about their various concerns they were scrutinised and studied, perhaps almost as narrowly as a man with a microscope might scrutinise the transient creatures that swarm and multiply in a drop of water. With infinite complacency men went to and fro over this globe about their little affairs, serene in their assurance of their empire over matter. It is possible that the infusoria under the microscope do the same. No one gave a thought to the older worlds of space as sources of human danger, or thought of them only to dismiss the idea of life upon them as impossible or improbable. It is curious to recall some of the mental habits of those departed days. At most terrestrial men fancied there might be other men upon Mars, perhaps inferior to themselves and ready to welcome a missionary enterprise. Yet across the gulf of space, minds that are to our minds as ours are to those of the beasts that perish, intellects vast and cool and unsympathetic, regarded this earth with envious eyes, and slowly and surely drew their plans against us. And early in the twentieth century came the great disillusionment. War of the Worlds. ----------

Heard the term Superordinate Principle in a J.Peterson online lecture somewhere, sounded fancy. Trying to figureout the most logical way to orientate my psychology. I figured if God was some kind of superordinate principle to J peterson, Freewill might be so for you, though I presume now you take Freewill as self evident. Consent though, I guess that's an interesting one. You say your Superordinate principIe relates to consent, but is it consent? Maybe too personal a question. I "feel" though in the modern world, people are perhaps disconnected from consent. Check boxes on Agreements, automated messaging services, trying to actually to talk to a person when dealing with taxes or businesses, state schools, mass migration (50% of a nearby town is Polish speaking near me), foreign remote control wars and drone strikes etc All heavily influenced by the state. Perhaps a persons Subordinate principle can be different for all, rather than let it be, trying to figureout how Freewill might tie into everything. Feed on itself and grow or sustain.

I guess I can sympathise a bit. My sister had eczema as a child, parents would bind her hands to stop her from scratching, also her teeth weren't straight. No such problems on my end. Also dentists in England in the past were paid by the number of filings they did, so both my parents probably had more filings than were necessary when they were children. Never was personally afraid of going to the dentist. Could attention be a form of fear though? I can imagine Germans saying something like "Achtung Spitfire!!!" or some military drill "Stand to Attention!"(dis-ease) then "At Ease". Damn, perhaps it was worth a try. Men don't generally go around affirming their individual or collective autonomy, through public speech or remonstration. Any such thing is going to be met with a "Yes Boss". Men have to actualize things through action, not reaction. Not to say there isn't necessarily feminin attributes sometimes in men "Swallowed a woman?" (talk too much), but they have to bring evidence usually and not feeling.

@S1988 Bursting into tears generally not a good way of developing agency. My sister would often do that when she was young and she would then get what she wanted literally all of the time. Which was generally attention. No room for any reasoned arguments or questions, fustrating as hell. I know if given the option I'd have chosen to live with my grandparents. Men generally don't worry at all about being "mean". Can I be your underling or slave?

Predetermined to what point though? The itsy bitsy spider climbed up the waterspout. Down came the rain and washed the spider out. Out came the sun and dried up all the rain and the itsy bitsy spider climbed up the spout again Interesting that you should mention spiders and free will, "made" me think of the "widow of the web" scene from a movie called "Krull" (Cult, Fantasy Film).

@shirgall People still make a God of something though, to truly be an Atheist wouldn't a concept(?) such as war have to be totally incomprehensible, instead would be a bunch(another God maybe/The collective) of people killing one another. I'm sure there are other things people make a God out of, Determinism. So if your superordinate principle is Freewill, does that in some way imply non-duality? So "Born to Kill" born is just born and kill is "just" kill. Language imposed dualism, I wonder if runic languages had that problem. Makes me think of the Predator movies and the runic like markings (although a countdown) on their "arm fixed" computer. "Want some Candy?" - Predator 2 Although in a contest to the death between 2 beings is reality the final arbiter? A lion presumably doesn't conceive of reality, where as a human "can" conceive of reality.

@Fashus Maximus Perceiving a threat is related to Neuroticism, also higher in Northern Europeans. Multiple things in nature than can kill you in colder rocky climates or even warm rocky ones before you can sire offspring. As for coercion depends how women are coerced. In less hospitable climates you'd farm, produce something of value to trade(other than more mouths to feed) or you die. A viking warlord may have concubines, but they got cremated along with him when he died (meagre resources, one big drunken orgy before you're killed), with the result, those with less agency being removed from the genepool proportionally. Iceland & Norway were the first countries to get rid of serfdom effectively in practice, although there maybe a token rent (1 loaf of bread a year), plus the church & monarchy excercised some muscle over landing fish for processing. Biologically women will always be secondary to a man in agency, but some ethnicities have more agency than others. Maybe in really hard climates, warfare situations women may form together in groups to try and preserve what agency they have, Amazons, Those Kurdish women in Iraq etc I heard somewhere that women in Mongolia are often quite independent and many have businesses, though I think that was on t.v so not entirely sure. Have to exercise some agency in practice when the men are away fighting. Or just because need to take care of herds in potentially -50c weather. Even given a harem situation eventually some women will exercise more agency then a man. Empiress of China, Ottoman Turks, Byzantine Empiress. Or just being born to kill, Queen Elizabeth, Queen Isabella of Spain, although they had many advisors that probably exercised more agency through them as a figurehead. I think there was some Assyrian Queen that asked to be Monarch for a day, then killed her husband.

I think in Northern Countries women generally have more agency. Need to split labour, for instance vikings going on raids often could use a good wife to look after the farm. So Norwegians typically have broad shoulders (ploughing), compared to many other ethnicities, as well as a good level of IQ to manage things. The difference is pretty stark when you compare to Sweden, more slender more agreeable in my opinion, a lot of government and state modelled on the French system/culture. I think agency greatly declines in more southern ethnicities. Although as noted by C.G.Jung southern European women become more masculine as they age and the men more feminin.

Perhap Freewill can be thought of the accumulation of experience and the projection of consciousness that makes you, you... So if Compatibilism(Freewill as Consciousness or accumulated experience?) allows for Atheism but is ultimately Deterministic. Couldn't it be said that Pantheism is as equally viable as Atheism? Consciousness as primary to reality. Yeah arguing over freewill is pointless, as it presumes you have freewill to change your mind. Else 1) Verbal domination/brainwashing. 2) Why not get the Axe? All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy All work and no play makes Jack a dull boyAll work and no play makes Jack a dull boy All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. "I'd sell my soul for a glass of beer." The Shining "Here's Johnny!!!" - The Shining

Confidence.and commitment.

I suppose in 95% of cases probably not. Not exactly many female members on the forum as far as I can tell. If women are generally more agreeable than men, that has got to mean generally less agaency. Women were not allowed to vote for reasons, that are all now too apparent. In Greece I heard that female children weren't generally spoken of, bit like the muslims trying for sons all the time. Even Ayn Rand said she found the idea that women being politicians or business leaders some what grotesque, though I guess there are the exceptions.

@shirgall So if determinism is a rationalization, would you say that is an equivalent of being stuck in some kind of loop? Freewill in contrast, would you say that it is not a rationalization? I could have chosen something different than I did. Consciouness reflecting back on itself. Would you agree with Mole that Freewill exists in compatibilism, but ultimately things are determined through causality. Because if things are ultimately determined, from a pure survival point of view wouldn't it be better to kill any form of freewill as a psychological process that delays reaction time. Maybe it would be best to reserve freewill for interactions between people, and always choose the same thing at a restaurant for example.

Yes was basically confirmig what you said. So a bear can not violate the NAP as it is uncapable of, and here is where I draw a distinction intiating aggression. However as I have stated feeding it( a form of violence), changes it's nature causing or encouraging it to use violence to get what it wants from man. " “You can’t kill the bear Charles! He’s ahead of us all the time! It’s like he’s reading our minds! He’s stalking us for God’s sake!”. The Edge (kill the bear speech) I still think it is important though to draw a distinction between Aggression and Violence. Instead of NAP why not NVP? Aggression. The use of force. Verbal or physical. Drill Sergent dressing down recruits. Violence. The intention or unprocessed emotions, that result in an animal causing evil to occur. Locking people in a Gulag and not giving a shit if they starve. Assertiveness. The affirmation of ones individuality. Pacifity. The avoidance of action and emotion. So saying humans did have the instinct to kill their offspring (through birth defects or just rejection/selfish gene) it would be a moral way to behave? Infanticide was prevelent in the ancient world.

@barn I think the distinction between virtue and honesty, would be a bit like comparing a spouse and a friend. With a friend you might split the costs of meals when going on a night out, talk about various issues. However with a spouse, both partners should ideally give (be virtuous) as much as possible to the relationship. Virtue is not an infinite resource. In regards to trust vs truth. There should be limits between friends. (for the simple fact ones time is limited to think about things) In regards to pursuing truth, maybe a preist or a therapist might help, or they might not... I think in the later case you are looking more for impartiality. Bringing your true-self to all relationships apart from the closest, maybe highly inappropriate, the question therefore for general socializing, what persona might you present to be able to interact more deeply perhaps?

@shirgall So is getting rid of Freewill a generally positive thing? or is it more deterimental as @Dylan Lawrence Moore seems to imply, by the revoking presumably of moral or perhaps personal "responsibility" or both? ----------------------- Perhaps getting rid of Freewill, is seen by some as "Enlightenment". Though wouldn't this be the equivalent of death in some maner? In order to take full advantage of feedback loops or "Freewill" what thoughts should be in the forefront of a person's mind? I can't see how Freewill can exist without the presence of some Diety, or some Quantumn Mechanical God. If science is structured around causality, what uses does synchronicity have, perhaps the phenoma of Freewill only exists to vacilitate the transfer of information, between two people.

@smarterthanone So it would be in no way wrong to feed a wild potentially dangerous animal? Yeah well the Bear/Beast is using aggression to defend its own survival, instinctively. So maybe aggression could be considered instinctual, though is violence instinctual as well? Are you saying there is no distinction between aggression and violence? Maybe could go further and mention that bears and many animals will kill female cubs to put the female into heat. Could that be considered instinct as well?

Real Friendship requires trust and kindness, because without trust there can be no reciprocity and without kindness no mutual support. and In order to be in a real friendship it is greatly beneficial to be virtous. As this means you have an excess to give to others.

@smarterthanone Liked the example of the bear. I wouldn't say that the bear is using violence as it defends it's rights of Life, Liberty and Property. Rather Aggression. As Steve Erwin (formerly known as the Crocodile Hunter) would say. "But I don't blame the bear, it's only doing what comes naturally to it." I think violence can be something that a person may consider trivial, like feeding a bear. With the following corruption that it may cause. Had the bear been more aggressive or fearful as to not to been fed, it would not be capable of violence, in regard to say losing that fear of man and expecting a meal....

Bitcoin, Lite Coin, Nova Coin, Iota Coin. "In the End there can be Only One." Remember from reading some of Von Mises "A Theory of Money and Credit". About the Gold standard and how all currencies were ultimately related to it. After WW1 the withdrawal of Great Britain, France and Germany from the Gold Standard. Led to Switzerland, who had ample Gold reserves withdrawing from the standard. An International exchange rate linked to American Gold reserves was still used however, to settle national debts. Possibly because countries could more easily (through public opinion/suffering) inflate away any national debts on other nations than their ethnic people. Can money really have no tangible value though? ( In the end we're all dead) There's that Atlas Shrugged money speech that is often brought up, about money being consciously created through effort. Would Bitcoin mean a more Platonic Financial System than an Aristotelian one? There was an economist called John Law, that overhauled the French Financial System. - Wikipedia John Law (baptised 21 April 1671 – 21 March 1729) was a Scottish economist who believed that money was only a means of exchange that did not constitute wealth in itself and that national wealth depended on trade. He was appointed Controller General of Finances of France under the Duke of Orleans, regent for the youthful king, Louis XV. How is Bitcoin immune from Government Manipulation? BUY BUY BUY!!!!!!, SELL SELL SELL!!!!!!

A military must be able to use as much aggression as possible, to achieve ends of defending a people lives, without resorting to overwhelming lethal force. If that means conscription, breaking down doors, torture, so be it, just not my door or body (Not that I'd be able to do much but flee). Any person who has successfully integrated the unconscious elements that make aggression possible, is not going to occupy themselves with the NAP. Violence for violence sake, is evil though. Luke 24 33 And when they were come to the place, which is called Calvary, there they crucified him, and the malefactors, one on the right hand, and the other on the left. 34 Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do. And they parted his raiment, and cast lots. 35 And the people stood beholding. And the rulers also with them derided him, saying, He saved others; let him save himself, if he be Christ, the chosen of God. I remember Tom Woods saying something like. "If someone breaks into my house to steal my TV, I don't then have the right to break into other 3rd Parties houses searching for my TV." But what if it was a family member you happened to like, in that situation I would have no problem with someone using aggression per se. Even if there was only an estimated 1% chance of finding them. French mercenaries; paid by the number of ears they collect in WW2. If military personell actually wanted to kill people why not do it unpaid, eye to eye? Any war they help contribute to, is probably going to negatively affect their salaried income, long term.

Atheism - There is No God, Area 51 does not exist. Conspiracy theories are a lie. "Tonight you sleep in Hell, There can be Only One!!" ("Highlander", The Kurgan beheading a preying Ramirez) Deism - God took one big dump/creation that he no longer interferes with. Functionally identical to Atheism. Any ghost self respawn would ultimately mean Pantheism. Were the Founding Fathers true deists? Or did they just say that to avoid political repercussions of being in an overwhelmingly Christian country. Theism - God can intervene in creation through miracles and revelation. "The Pulp Fiction Bible" "The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who, in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know my name is the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon thee." Pantheism (Leftists and Islamists) - God is everything, you are hallucinating reality right now. Brains do not exist, the formulation/illusion of a brain is ultimately something egoic(illusion) that cuts you off from the totality of creation and allows the simulation to run. "You" (If such a thing can be said to exist) are a figment of the mind of God. You are basically in one big video game with respawn. All words are a construction, silence is golden. "Death to Videodrome, Long live the New Flesh!" (Videodrome) How can Freewill be reconciled with Atheism, is it the case that it is only psychologically true? some psychological fluke that results from errors in ones thought process. Or someway evolutionary advantageous way of gaining abstract information from another person. In order to choose something other than, which that might have been chosen, wouldn't there need to be some act of spontaneous creation by God? Otherwise given natural law and causality every action whether perceived as good, bad or Evil doesn't really matter, you didn't have any real choice "you"(If such a thing can exist are a Clockwork Orange) only thought/projected you did. I can only see Theism, as compatible with freewill. God creates which allows for the possibility of choice, through some Divine Grace, Freewill being a phenomena that has potential to grow and increase consciousness rather than be eliminated as some kind of disorder(which maybe it is). Perhaps eliminating the imperfection of freewill in oneself and others would be a worthy goal? To truly be Atheistic? Perhaps Freewill is the best disorder to have and under no circumstances question or turn it in on itself?

I think they are vital to the survival of a nation and/or ethnic people and any people that doesn't support them is ultimately screwed. Even a tiny military has disproportionate ability to exercise force. Something called the "Peasants war in Germany" lead to 7,000 soldiers up against 300,000 rebels butchering over 100,000 rebels, with negligible casualties. If someone holds to the NAP they are excluded from the military, if they hold to their principle. Personally I do not subscribe to the NAP, I can see situations where aggression can be useful and perhaps morally right. Like that film clip during Vietnam showing a VC prisoner being executed and getting his brains blown out, blood spurting out the side of his head on camera. Personally I'm not a military type person, tend to be very introverted, not highly motivated and focused enough. @Chris hart So are you just throwing around opinions or arguing against the military? Ultimately it is the civilian leadership that makes the military more or less necessary for various groups of people.

@barnWhat other ramifications do you see a UPB MASTER PHILOSOPHER would have brought to the Jedi, other than my example? I think it would be the equivalent as if a "UPB Master" had gone to a Buddhist Zen Monastery. To teach about the self and UPB, when the very core of their religion ultimately rejects the self. Spiritual Nihilism. In the West. Academies or Academia rely on funding from somewhere, the JEDI Academy or SJW University relies on collective contributions and is based on "Merit"(Who decides?, the SJW/JEDI council). Ultimately though UPB is an extension of Kant's Moral Imperative with a few caveats 1) You don't have to be honest all the time like some Robot, useful for the "authorities". 2) It's extension to taxation. 3)The rejection of "Kant's a Goodwill" and the assertion of reason and evidence as primary. Though what would a UPB Master be a Master of? Some logical constructions in his head. The idea being to lead by example. I'm doing well so people will follow me. They might, or they may prefer to try and drag you down to their level, behavioural I.Q wise doesn't matter, Darwinian/Nietzchean Will to Power. So ad-hoc support of Trump(though the most vocal on Youtube imho) and the occasional good deed, but no unity, no positive affirmation of Ethics(which Stefan has said, when it comes down to it, is refraining from actions) or Morality. Follow UPB have personal integrity and people will follow. I also remember him saying 1) Never start a movement like Obectivism did. 2) Do not name "your" philosophy after yourself. Though given "demographics" any real world action imho is going to go one of 2 paths. Direct democracy and therefore fragmentation into smaller countries even to the city level i.e Sarajavo Or Nightwatchmen state. I remember reading something about Aristotle that it is nearly impossible to be moral or ethical in a thoroughly corrupt society N.Korea as one example, Sweden, Germany, Canada, UK, all on their way.