RichardY

Looks a bit like Nicomachean Ethics by Aristotle(but with psychobabble), people and civilisations are usually more productive when such ideals are embraced(at least according to Ayn Rand). An attempt to answer character ethics in the positive(like Nietzsche), as opposed to refraining from action, such as in the Categorical Imperative.

In Saudi Arabia you could buy a wife with camels.

Wild guess, but are Eva's parents Jewish and John is a Christian.

I wouldn't say Stefan is doing Pro-Trump videos as such, mostly refuting the M.S media. That missile strike on Syria and the comments on that guy Bill Mitchel(silver hair hunger games style) sub-tweeting someone, could sense the tension imo, could see Stefan was pissed. Though if they were going to do the "right"/sensible(how to articulate I don't know) thing during the election they didn't really have a choice. All those 4-D chess memes.... It would be interesting to get more of an Irrationalist perspective like Scott Adams more often. From looking a little bit at Greek mythology, many concepts motivations are covered implicitly kind of sounds occult like, but can see it copied and articulated in modern culture. C.G. Jung — 'Until you make the unconscious conscious, it will direct your life and you will call it fate.' I tend to view the forum as a potential place to gather and share information(trader principle) on Philosophy, Psychology, Current Events. Articulate thoughts with greater precision. Something more interesting then video games. Get a dialogue going and not a casual conversation, I know when I first posted the forum was not particularly welcoming, I'm patient with people prefer to acquire some productive or interesting knowledge(If everyone picked a genius and quoted passages could really harvest some information, a Blue Harvest). I resist impulses I have to put the knife in and twist(Not productive), though if they're just plain cruel or trolling(unproductive) why not? I'm fallible, sometimes not even twist. Determinism and Freewill, plus derivative threads seemed to come up a lot in the past. Try to suppress it with signature. Lot of inconsequential crap as well, like arguing over the definition of social media. Kind of annoying, that perhaps the full potential of the forum is not reached, as a tool could be great to dissect various sources of information.

Sounds a bit like the movie The Butterfly Effect or the Book "Notes from the Underground" by Fyodor Dostoyevsky. They don't want the daughter Eva to leave, using religion as an excuse. Support your cousin the best way you can as a friend, but ultimately it is his and Eva's decision, given what you have said, the parents are superfluous. Getting involved may make the situation worse.

Great Britain is a 3rd World Country, at least parts of it(2nd World where I live, empty shelves and Eastern European shop names and all) Food Banks and I heard Glasgow has a life expectancy of 50 in some areas. Margaret Thatcher wasn't nearly tough enough imho, got stabbed in the back over the poll tax. Wasn't ruthless enough, militarily, cut the budget and then when there was conflict didn't wipe out the Argentinian fleet. I mean wtf why didn't she use nuclear weapons(or MOAB on leadership if they "don't exist"), go with emp as a warning, decimate the economy. Colorado Springs. A lot of the towns in the mountains were former Gold mining areas now almost abandoned when contrasted to their former population. Remember travelling through one town(victor) had a population of like 200(destruction of tax base) was 20,000 odd at its peak, then gold nationalisation under FDR. Another town cripple creek, had only really survived due to gambling being legal in the town. Besides the metal theft in the article happens around where I live(lead tiles, wiring, fibre optics mistaken for metal) and probably virtually everywhere(heard of a story from a person in Norway about thieves removing cable from the rail infrastructure), promoting "crony" capitalists as a solution, gross in a way, even says that an industrialist organised the planting of 10,000 trees. A lot of "nice" looking places often seem to be financed with blood money to some degree. Thinking of 3rd World dictators in parts of London, although I'm sure there are others Passau in Austria gave me the impression of being financed with blood money, Switzerland and Sweden probably another example to some degree. Anywhere green and pleasant looking in Europe I wonder. Germany is a very clean country, though they are pretty addicted to cigarettes, have vending machines for them. Japanese I guess enjoy watching their torture on "game shows"(also saw a programme on TV about them buying dirty knickers). Might be partially related to having hundreds of thousands of people incinerated.

A few general thoughts. Self Knowledge. Split focus between Self Knowledge and the wider implications in society(universal Ethics). Though both are related given the speed of changes in society(to the detriment of all) there has been a shift from more specific micro-level personal problems to wider macro-generalities imo. Maybe someone will develop a more specific focus on self-knowledge (their own show), not ignore wider problems in society but maintain a focus on individual self-knowledge and not the universality of ethics in general society. Depth of conversation/Focus on Quality. Hubris. The amount of knowledge out there is staggering, but much of it seems derivative of a few key thinkers, though some authors or posters may write a lot, they lack original creativity.Diminishing returns . In an acknowledgement of that, I have begun to look at the more hardcore thinkers, bring in the sledgehammers perhaps, of Nietzsche, Heidegger, Kant, Leibniz, Carl Jung. Would be good if some audio books were easily available of the source material and not just tomes and if lucky fragmented librivox recordings. To what end, I don't know. "Of all that is written, I love only what a person hath written with his blood. Write with blood, and thou wilt find that blood is spirit. It is no easy task to understand unfamiliar blood; I hate the reading idlers. He who knoweth the reader, doeth nothing more for the reader. Another century of readers—and spirit itself will stink. Every one being allowed to learn to read, ruineth in the long run not only writing but also thinking. Once spirit was God, then it became man, and now it even becometh populace. He that writeth in blood and proverbs doth not want to be read, but learnt by heart." Trump election. Character Disposition. imo Annoyed the more left-wing Libertarians, who tend to write reams.They also tend to read a lot, so are likely to be apt, but shallow in multiple areas of knowledge. Reading Ayn Rand Introduction to Epistemology kind of highlighted this, how to integrate information into a more stable matrix of knowledge and not vast disparate formulas and pieces of information. Separation of Church and State. Can't have separation if you don't have a church. Metaphysics. Lack of Ethos in society. Christianity Ethics, Buddhist Priesthood, alternate ethos people are willing to bleed for? Alternatively there is Islam, but that is an equivalent of "She who must be Obeyed". Why the von Misesian argument can't be adopted instead, is kind of an annoyance. Maybe the shear weight emotionally, intellectually of the topics being considered is too much of a drain for most people, working full time or addicted to one thing or another. Can't really find any hardcore philosophy forums ("One repays a teacher poorly, if he remains but a student") compared to FDR. Perhaps someone knows any forums with a hardcore focus on self knowledge?

Metaphysical Positions. Physicalism - (Everything Matter) - Determinism/Predetermined, No ethics. Mind/Spirtialism - (Everything Consciousness, Everything Part of God, Part of a Tribe, Pantheism)- Spinoza and the Stoics, No ethics. Dualism - After thinking about the first 2 positions I was inclined to conclude that to allow for the possibility of Ethics dualism might be the way to go. The conclusion of which made multiple universes a possibility. Although thinking about it, maybe this would be similar to the Euthyphro scenario by Plato, Socratic Dialogues. Leibnizian Monadology - I guess allows for the possibility of Ethics(Ethos?), but includes the acceptance of God, from reading briefly about it, it also seems to resolve the "double slit physics experiment phenomena". I came across the following quote by Schoppenhauer on Wikipedia "Higher Consciousness". "The better consciousness in me lifts me into a world where there is no longer personality and causality or subject or object. My hope and my belief is that this better (supersensible and extra-temporal) consciousness will become my only one, and for that reason I hope that it is not God. But if anyone wants to use the expression God symbolically for the better consciousness itself or for much that we are able to separate or name, so let it be, yet not among philosophers I would have thought." Donna?, could you recommend any books to read on Lebinizian Monadology or perhaps Dualism? Or perhaps something else. If anyone has other ideas on different metaphysical positions I'm open to suggestions, please share.

Guess that's why vampires fail...

I'm going to say the opposite, here's an assertion of my thinking. Logic or Logos "may" involve an Archetypal God(The Father) Figure, it is the embodiment of everything within a single-whole(Logo) as another forum member donnadogosth often states a "monad". Reason is biological and evidence sensation. Manifest God(The Abrahamic Judeo-Christian one), is higher consciousness. It is possible to be intelligent and unconscious, Artists, Authors, people on the "Left" are examples of this. Maybe why people on the "Right" that tend to be more conscious and Christian are opposed, or were to drugs Narcotics. "And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely." The Bible/Fallout 3

Gingers have no souls....

Sounds a bit like my father(though probably about average IQ), always picking "sides" with him. Not open to discussion or conversation a brutal Nietchzcean will to Power, probably had about 10 hours conversation over the course of my lifetime mostly about paperwork(intuitively and not counting informalities). Still with my parents, a bum basically, though not an excuse, materially quite a comfortable existence for the UK (area I live in is rural and has had highest migration in human history), they had my grandfather help out a lot with 0% interest loans when rates were high. I thought my father was going to kill me outright when I was 4 or 5, quite tyrannical. Mother in contrast quite a reclusive and motherly figure both parents not very conscientious/conscious.

Abandoned Love? I can hear the turning of the key I’ve been deceived by the clown inside of me I thought that he was righteous but he’s vain Oh, something’s telling me I wear the ball and chain I’ve given up the game, I’ve got to leave The pot of gold is only make-believe The treasure can’t be found by men who search Whose gods are dead and whose queens are in the church

"A righteous man falling down before the wicked is as a troubled fountain, and a corrupt spring." Proverbs 25:26 To slay the balrog within, Gander(To take a look) Gandalf.

"Physiologists should think before putting down the instinct of self-preservation as the cardinal instinct of an organic being. A living thing seeks above all to discharge its strength—life itself is will to power—: self-preservation is only one of the indirect and most frequent results.— In short, here as everywhere else, let us beware of superfluous teleological principles!—one of which is the instinct of self-preservation (we owe it to Spinoza's inconsistency—). Thus method, which must be essentially economy of principles, demands it." Beyond Good and Evil. By default the organisms ability to reproduce, what warps a particular persons personality in society is anyone's guess. But as personality like Economics is a closed system, to push one aspect is to expand another (Equilibrium).

Ok fair enough, just because you might understand the physics of the Sun, doesn't mean you can cause it to burn brighter. But as you said "Attraction and love are pretty well understood from a biochemical perspective." Where did you get the information? Does it mean you can tell if someone is in love from measuring various hormones present in the blood? and what if the love is based on a lie? or unrequited?

Not sure, but if you could cause someone to love a person is it really love? Someone might say love is the reward for virtue but there doesn't seem to be any guarantees anywhere and Crucifixion seems to be the other reward. Guess it depends on your metaphysical basis. Purely chemical physicalism(which I guess could count S&M), A Conscious Universe, Panthesim, Spinoza and Lebiniz. (Everything that happens is Love and part of a greater whole). Or something else.

You can be consciously Evil. Why does Evil have to be accidental? Besides if you're atheistic even more incentive. Know you are personally responsible and cover up the crime(an admission of responsibility). Besides if you have high level of conscious you can run a simulation(daydream) of say chopping people up or play GTA or DOOM, watch SAW, FURY or that new play with Trump in it. In contrast if your not conscious, what's stopping you from acting out demonic unconscious desires and having them perhaps in part tamed. I think a lot of people seem to be more in line with the Randian Sub-conscious mind (Tabula Rasa), probably because their unconscious desires are repressed. Take the Japanese, Germans, Scandinavians, Americans, British or Mongols for example, high levels of consciousness(High deferral of Gratification) capable of extreme brutality. Maybe not acting in Europe because they want epic bloodshed, at least a part, especially with stored up resentment. Why go for small-scale bloodletting or rubbish leftist plays, why not wait do nothing and have fountains of blood. Can just then say well that's war and abdicate personal responsibility later, "I know nothing Mr Faulty". I was working contributing to the economy, didn't bother counting demographics besides think of all those high-tech Arab and Sub-Saharan Companies out there with there skilled workers etc.

No different from eating large quantities of chocolate then?

Love?

Taken in full context the statement is Indicative Conditional and not Accusative. As for certainty, I've been thinking about metaphysical premises. Haven't grasped the full implications, though from listening to various philosophical works Spinoza, Marcus Aurelius and Hegel, seem to me, to be more on the "Left" and absolutist. Not looked much into Descartes Hyperbolic doubt or Kant's works yet. No, and at no point was that my intention. I will however circumvent your presumptions and make a case for where, when, how and why it is the case. (mostly to expand my own ideas/cultural references, and perhaps have them weighed by others) To begin with what is actually meant by Left and Right Wing. Google has Left wing: listed with nondescript adjectives such as "Radical", "Reforming". Right wing:" Reactionary""Conservative". But reforming in what, reactionary in what. Instead I propose that Left and Right wing are merely levels of consciousness. As society becomes in general less conscious, generally expressed in the decline of culture with more base and less complex expression, Society and Government inevitably moves towards the "left". The reasons for becoming less conscious are varied but in the short term may involve various narcotics including alcohol, but may also involve entertainment in the general culture and more crucially the undermining of morality explicitly(Postmodernism), but mostly implicitly(Taxation is theft, "Schooling", No Natural Rights). After a traumatic incident consciousness is often lost, although a person may act conscious i.e respond to questions when asked and have no memory of the event when asked to recall later, there is no continuity, the same thing may occur when people are drunk, partially asleep or leftists. A young Capitalist has no heart, an old communist no brain. Conversely the lack of stimulus or the ability to recognise abstract counterfactual statements may delay the development of consciousness. Considering psychological countermeasures a few thoughts came to mind, not fully coherently formed but I think relevant. Jacob's Ladder between Heaven and Hell both the movie and bible. The Greek God Iris(messenger between Heaven and Earth) with hetrochromia. Josephs Technicolor dreamcoat. The movie 28 Days Later(inspired by Day of the Triffids) and it's sequel 28 Weeks Later involves the psychological phenomenon of dualism, the main actress in 28 Weeks Later is resistant to the Rage virus(though a Carrier) controlling her behaviour, due to her hetrochromia(or dualism). In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king. At the end of LOTR ROTK just before the Ring is destroyed in the movie. Frodo puts on the Ring and becomes "invisible" Absolute Power involves the loss of identity(a hollow man). Anyway Gollum bites Frodo's finger off and gets the Ring, ends up being pushed into the volcano. Once the principle of an Absolute controlling Power is destroyed, the army of Mordor feels fear and runs. Likewise in Starship Troopers the ordinary Bugs don't feel fear only the Brain Bug. The mobile infantry in contrast is shitting their pants initially in the movie, Child soldiers may not feel fear if indoctrinated and sometimes chemically drugged. As for Leftist Ideology how many leftists have actually read Das Kapital? There's probably more Libertarian scholars that have. Instead the idea of the influence of Cultural Marxism and Feminism is pervasive at least on the Internet. Why try to influence people intentionally towards the left? Unconscious people easy to exploit if not "triggered". Is there Life on Mars?

Pfttt, how do you know? By your own admission you contradict your first assertion. And If you already know why are you even posting. How do you know what people feel? If you are inferring, other examples such as, Human wave attacks (Zulus), Young children on rollercoasters, go against what you assert. If you believe something with certainty and haven't left the Island(Paradise, or going to) why would you fear. You use collective pronouns to describe "they, we, their" and are committing the same hypocrisy.

Gradually it has become clear to me what every great philosophy so far has been: namely, the personal confession of its author and a kind of involuntary and unconscious mémoires; also that the moral (or immoral) intentions in every philosophy constituted the real germ of life from which the whole plant had grown. Indeed, if one would explain how the abstrusest metaphysical claims of a philosopher really came about, it is always well (and wise) to ask first: at what morality does all this (does he—) aim? Accordingly, I do not believe that a "drive for knowledge" is the father of philosophy; but rather that another drive has, here as elsewhere employed knowledge (and mis-knowledge!) as a mere instrument. In the philosopher conversely, there is nothing whatever that is impersonal; and above all his morality bears decided and decisive witness to who he is—that is, in what order of rank the innermost drives of his nature stand in relation to each other. You want to live "according to nature"? Oh you noble Stoics, what deceptive words these are! Imagine a being like nature, wasteful beyond measure, indifferent beyond measure, without purpose and consideration, without mercy and fairness, fertile and desolate and uncertain at the same time; imagine indifference itself as a power—how could you live according to this indifference? Living—is that not precisely wanting to be other than this nature? Is not living estimating, preferring, being unjust, being limited, wanting to be different? And supposing your imperative "live according to nature" meant at bottom as much as "live according to life"—how could you not do that? Why make a principle of what you yourselves are and must be?— In truth, the matter is altogether different: while you pretend rapturously to read the canon of your law in nature, you want something opposite, you strange actors and self-deceivers! Your pride wants to impose and incorporate your morality, your ideal onto nature, even onto nature, you demand that it be nature "according to the Stoa," and you would like all existence to exist only after your own image—as an immense eternal glorification and universalization of Stoicism! For all your love of truth, you have forced yourselves so long, so persistently, so rigidly and hypnotically to see nature falsely, namely stoically, that you are no longer able to see it differently—and some abysmal arrogance finally still inspires you with the insane hope that because you know how to tyrannize yourselves—Stoicism is self-tyranny—, nature, too, lets itself be tyrannized: is not the Stoic—a piece of nature? ..... But this is an old, eternal story: what formerly happened with the Stoics still happens today, as soon as any philosophy begins to believe in itself. It always creates the world in its own image, it cannot do otherwise; philosophy is this tyrannical drive itself, the most spiritual will to power, to the "creation of the world," to the causa prima. ------------- Thought of the above passages of Beyond Good and Evil as relevant. The Left; which I perceive to be equated with the unconscious masses rather than Radical, Reformist, Progressive or any other nondescript adjective. A person does not have to be anxious or fearful to be on the Left, they may in fact be a figure more like a King Leah or Marcus Aurelius(stoic), a useful Idiot. They may also be hyper rational and violent, like a Caeser. "The human livestock managers"(no morality,"Enlightened Individuals"), contrasting to a recent video by Stefan. Concordantly another Youtube video "Intro to Systems Thinking" is the manifestation of such a phenomenon imho. "Large organisations tend to drift to the Left" I remember Stefan saying this a long while ago. In contrast someone on the Right would be more like a Cicero. The disadvantage to the Right being the lack of individuated conscientious people. As for the Modern Left, I guess one way of perceiving what is in fact "Modern" and not a repetition, some link to the past is required as well as distance from society. "Modern Man in search of a Soul" touches on the idea of what is modern, somewhere towards the end of the book.

Just speculation but if intelligence was more dominant genetically, wouldn't IQ increase exponentially quickly. Hence high IQ sometimes skipping generations. Good eyesight perhaps being more dominant genetically and critical for early mans survival.