RichardY

I would say "the perfect ideology is based on survival" to quote the X-Files movie. But survival of what? According to Rand survival of man qua man. But hypothetically what if through surgery an organ biological or mechanical could be implanted to allow for a collective consciousness? So instead of using mirror neurons to interpret empathy, you get direct feedback via telepathy from another. Wouldn't a collective consciousness be superior to an individual one? This would not be the equivalent of the borg(collective unconsciousness), but instead something like the movie "Scanners", or Cyborgs. She outright denies the concept of instinct, she had me going for a while. I do find the theory of the unconscious vs subconscious mind interesting though, things like projection I don't think would be possible without an unconscious mind, and things like Affirmations should in theory be super effective, if the subconscious mind were true.

What would be truth to you? Or the best method of approaching truth. I don't like the term justified true believe, but as a process, what would epistemically as a base(or no base) be the best way of approaching truth, through knowledge already acquired. I don't like the term "justified" as it implies social agreement. I think truth should be able to be expressed through symbology created or observed by an individual. Effectively creating your own script, and not using the latin, at least in potentiality. So lets say Justified True Belief is not an effective base to express truth through knowledge, what would be? Would you say then as we can not know anything with absolute certainty, Ethics does not apply to me or indeed to thee. So in principle, if I could acquire various goods without reciprocating I should pursue that method and go scorched earth as the only way to be sure, in order to avoid possible retaliation? Perhaps like the mafia or mass graves in N.Korea. The only thing preventing me being a weakness of position and character. A Goodfellow?

Well you say you are Christian, Christians are usually compassionate, following the example of Christ. Was interested empirically, what you do to help people.

No. My mind is too fried for that. 4:30am and my sleep schedule is messed up, think a bit like the narrator off fight club as a cliche. Probably a lot(which isn't much), given I'm not inclined to be agreeable with the rest of society. Maybe more like codependency, my own mother is low in conscientiousness, my dad's mother highly conscientious. Low and High conscientiousness pairing off. Boobs good(but not joke size), share similar interests, that's about it. Well I suppose a person can go shopping. Add a few more models to their collection, display them on Instagram like an Arab Sheikh. What's your sexual market value? "F*CK! YOU! That's my name! You know why, mister? 'Cause you drove a Hyundai to get here tonight, I drove an $80,000 BMW. That's my name!" Actually I see what you mean. But you're wrong. I view society as Evil, where as Stefan views it as Good, and the State Evil. I see the state as an extension of society, not separate. Was listening to Michel de Montaigne on Audible a while a go during a fairly frustrating backpacking trip. Anyway, he said society was evil and very few men good, I found it funny because he was talking about a society called the Furyan's like off the Movie "The Chronicles of Riddick."

I think Objectivism is useful especially the epistemology side. Finding contemporary alternatives to Rand though seems difficult. Either crazy French Or some totally unfamiliar logical games in American or English philosophers. I think listening or reading Aristotle, is better then reading Rand's "updated" version. Yeah there's probably confirmed error's in it but the bulk seems Good. His name even means the Best. Became aware of it fairly late, looking originally at economics, first Chicago School, then saw book reviews on Amazon saying Austrian Economics was the way to go. So Ludwig von Mises, then I became aware of Rand. I did find might self totally rejecting the notion of the unconscious after reading Rand, so things like "The Sh*test" "Cognitive dissonance" "double think i.e hate speech" don't mean much if you accept the subconscious theory of the mind. The idea "man has the choice to think or not to think" and that's it. A large part of what a person does occurs unconsciously, but accepting that, I don't think people, and I myself didn't like to think there could be influences beyond my initial control or awareness.

Not really interested in being normalised, given the sh*t that goes on. There was a shift from the individual YOU to the collective WE, yeah they both embody each other in different ways, Right containing the notion of left. I think because with the relationship stuff, I would be more inclined to get to know someone for a year, not ask them for their spreadsheet as Stefan might (maybe he was joking). More aesthetically based, and exploratory, mostly subjective. Looking a bit at my own family tree at mostly my father's side, most women were around or just before their mid 30's. My own mother was 36 when I was born. Grandmother had fertility treatment when there was only a few specialists in the country. So usually just 2 or 3 children for, obvious reasons. Even distant ancestors didn't seem to have many kids, when they could have easily afforded/produced them. Kind of fu*ked up genetics, not viewing women as baby making machines, when to some extent darwinianly or Satanically speaking it would make sense.

I like the idea of self-ownership, responsibility not that keen on, especially factoring in liability, all to often seems like an excuse for passing the buck. Reminds me of Dr Jordan Peterson using "Bucko" a lot. This isn't a place for agreement. Fight!!!! I think Ayn Rand was wrong about a few things. 1) Rejection of the Freudian unconscious in favour of a subconscious mind. 2) "The Virtue of selfishness." Aristotle often has meanness as opposed to prodigality a worse vice in Nicomachean Ethics. She also didn't have any children, which she might have had if altruistic. 3) "What is good for man's life, is good for man." 4) Dogmatism as Objectivism being a complete system.

Psychologically how is saying that I have freewill a benefit? In saying that, haven't I already limited myself to hypothetical choices within my conscious awareness? In saying that I have freewill, doesn't it necessarily hold that you follow the maker and taker dichotomy, that Stefan often uses instead of the have's and have not's. Matter must after all be created by something in order for creativity to have any merit, and freewill to be possible. In doing so doesn't that effectively blindside you while conferring a certain amount of clarity. Instead why not leave freewill as a mute point something akin to what Aristotle does? As opposed to affirming freewill, more akin to Ayn Rand. In contrast I have observed that Determinists often have double-think. If there is a trade-off however, and I must choose one, I would choose freewill. Although I don't really believe in either.

Thought I might mention my above post above post was mostly a mix of ideas that I usually have come to me, but find difficult to process, the first paragraph was recent the rest kind of trying to understand society psychologically, through a bit of symbolism and genetics. Perhaps a Jungian Archetype in a way being the equivalent of a meme. So not really complete, but what the hell.

I've always noticed odd things that didn't seem quite right from an early age, things in society that seemed totally f*cked up with no one seeming to care. But getting to philosophy, like being blunted by a wall then dragged through a Hawthorne hedge, the pain being curious, but reaching a peculiar level of enjoyment, generally increasing my contempt for people. I know Stefan often says going to University for instance won't make you smarter, often using a basketball analogy with players getting taller, from my point of view there's still critical thinking & conceptual thought that you might have not been exposed to at all, like in 1984 not having the words or concept to express and order various ideas, things being influenced on a more instinctual to conscious level if at all, but not quite in language.

How are you compassionate? Perhaps being appropriate to talk about the figure of Christ, depending on who you listen to, the Anti-Christ isn't a false Christ but the imbues some of the inhumane elements.

Essentially I think Military Dictatorship, naked force, no taxation is force BS, straight up pay or die tribute. Libya was the most successful country in Africa despite hit lists, before it got bombed to oblivion over using gold as money. People are too retarded for a Republic (eugenic degradation low birth rate), which I think should be Aristocratic. And no state is fantasy land, although an admirable ideal solution. Mostly though interested in my own neck and no other, although I find the topics more entertaining than amateur gaming. ---------------------------------------- I think the "Alt-Right" is more of a revolution than a movement. I remember Stefan saying something like "Organisations drift to the left", which I agree with. In contrast, more right wing groups tend to fragment. I think even Rand mentioned something about right wing ideologues fragmenting, although it could be Mises, might be both. There aren't many people I would consider Alt-Right. I think the meat of the topic is the race & IQ, genetics and the idea of a warrior gene, kill or be killed stuff, or at least have freedom of association. I think it's obvious that the numbers of people being born into this world (3X f*cking times in the last 50 years, in some 3rd world countries) and migrating to the West, is going to end in catastrophe. How best to articulate that to westerners & whites that double down on and move closer to a wider collective. Speak the truth, sure, but in a Darwinian World(kind of a recurrent theme) with stubborn universalism, what difference is it going to make. Instead of Right vs Left. more a case of, individualism(Nationalism) vs collectivism(Globalism), there is an element of each other in both, and they are relative. In addition may also affect how a person processes information. Or whether someone can transcend the paradigm completely? ------------------------------ Might be going entirely off base, but being a bit of a gamer, the cult classic Command & Conquer had two main factions. GDI (The Globalists) & NOD (The Brotherhood). Thought it was interesting because they actually ripped off some of the lore from the book "1984" the "Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past." just replaced control with command & conquer. The symbolism of the factions GDI The Eagle, generally a conscientious symbol, whether used in Rome or Germany. And NOD a scorpion, a non-conscientious symbol. The Land of NOD being a phrase associated with sleep or the unconscious. Anyway within the context of the game both factions fight over corruption or Tiberium (an alien crystal, named after the first really corrupt emperor..... or according to the game a river). ----------------------------- Problem, I'm selfish to the extreme, also not social. I don't agree with Rand that selfishness is a virtue, it maybe a strength in certain circumstances. Altruism maybe far more useful, especially if considering the idea of the selfish gene, being generous as being far more useful socially, especially in a resource rich environment, which given modern technology shouldn't be a problem, if altruistic. 2 or 3 How does it concern you? -----------------------------

I read some of his autobiography a while a go, picked it up for a pound in a charity/thrift shop. Forgot about being left by his mother to find his way, although remember one where he mentioned going on a boat in S.America just before there was a storm. The boat sank according to him, and the captain drowned, despite the captain's initial reservations of going out.

I think it relates to mirror neurons. Whether you can grow and wire additional mirror neurons, as if you could grow another arm or leg, I'm sceptical of. The next best thing being able to wire the neurons that you currently have, being aware on some level. I think someone like Richard Branson might have more mirror neurons than usual. Making better negotiators and better able to serve people's taste in music & culture, for example. It may also make you a better learner from people. .

The whole being greater than the sum of its parts? So mathematics that does not conform to reality/existence, 2 + 2 = 4, would be more like 2 + 2 = 3 or 5. Respectively losing or gaining in the transfer? A kind of friction. In which case, wouldn't "Enlightenment" be the ending of simulations? I have seen presumably, Leftists making a cult out of consciousnesss, the whole guru thing. Instead of materialism, spiritialism. Might be like the in the concentration camps from "Man's Search for Meaning", where some prisoners effectively "gave up", thereby enlightened........ ------------------- I suppose I'm looking for a way around a deterministic metaphysic, psychologically I don't think determinism makes sense, I thought maybe consciousness could be another way of thinking about something not deterministic, but not quite freewill either. Although would like to come up with something other than Determinism Plus ie Compatibilism. Perhaps emergentism may provide answers, I think Nietzsche had the idea of existence being more like a chaotic flux.

@Siegfried von Walheim What do you write about/create? I think the concept of the personality test is valid, but the explanation is very very poor/counter productive, tells you nothing about the test its self being based on Jung's work. Instead get a copy of a copy of a copy. I think most people get, some are more outgoing and tend to be extroverted, or the opposite, but no description of the mechanism. What do you think you are personality wise? Personally I think my complete lack of agreeableness. Lack of compassion & politeness (though culture raises it, a bit), is possibly due to a fewer mirror neurones from birth than normal. Which probably impaired certain ways of learning. In contrast I think some like Richard Branson for example, might have an excess of mirror neurones, than normal. Openness: High in intellect, fairly high in openness to experience. Conscientiousness: Low in both Industriousness and Order. Introversion/Extroversion: I think extroverts can generally ramp up the power when needed, where as introverts work opposite to that.

@shirgall If an emergent property, wouldn't that be the equivalent of Property Dualism? Making brainz a special type of matter, usually think of "Return of the Living dead." origin of tarman the brain eating zombie. I did have the thought that perhaps the idea/error of God may prevent people from fulfilling their full potential, specifically the idea, that God bestows some form of afterlife. Maybe holding firm to a particular presupposition since the word God is difficult to forget, would be the way to go and remain in the present, as the only thing we have?

You did it, you did this to him, you cut up his brain you bloody baboons!

I wouldn't say emotions are involuntary responses. Feelings though, can't argue with. I remember one of the intro's to one of Stefan's books mentioning him saying to his mother something like "I feel you aren't listening to me." and the response being "of cause I listen to you." A wasp can be pissed off/agitated, but is it right to say that it's feeling or acting on the emotion of disgust or anger. From reading listening to Spinoza's "The Ethics", there is a section on emotional management towards the end of the book, he takes a purely deterministic viewpoint, with the idea of being able to conceive of Absolute infinity man's greatest cognitive faculty. Anyway he say's to the extent one feels, they are hated, they in turn hate. It's funny in a way because towards the end of the books he's advocating for a welfare state, and outright terror to maintain it. Maybe he helped partially to inspire(?) the "Reign of Terror in France". Past, Present & Presumably future. Freud in comparison to Spinoza, takes a Compatibilist Authoritarian view, he still argues for a welfare state, but essentially has a form of enlightened dictatorship, using fear as a deterent. As "he has empirical proved an unconscious mind", it maybe possible to become conscious of some of those impulses and thereby transcend them to some extent. Spinoza in contrast says, 'as we can not be sure where are impulses come from" reason alone is sufficient and deterministic, which will help guide us to the appropriate emotional response. I think Spinoza's "The Ethics" is a much better book than "Civilization and it's discontents". I think Spinoza falls prey to double think, however, there might be some major advantages to such a condition, using the unconscious, to choose what particular stimulus to value in order to avoid "pain" or cognitive dissonance. Bit like in 1984 where "in order to function in this society, you have to believe 2+2=4 & 2+2=5 and genuinely believe it." Wether this could be implemented in someway in Spinoza Modal Logic, maybe. Is ACT or CBT something you can do on yourself or something if you wanted to do, would have to kind of forget about setting it up, magic mirror on the wall not being effective. For example, kind of like sending yourself a telegram, which you set to a future date to surprise yourself. So you forget the original reason why you did it. It's more than a feeling....

I guess cosmos or existence itself, maybe consciousness. Yeah, consciousness itself is God. Been toying with the idea, I don't think God is chance now, after reading some of David Hume. I think people make a God of War, the state and probably other things, Determinism for instance. Although praying to consciousness, as a phenomena not dictated by matter..... Religions though dedicated to consciousness, would be like saying druidism, shaminism or animism were religions.

@barn Why do you care?

What about the principle of sufficient reason? If not a delusion would it be fair to call God an illusion? And it to that extent exists. God is existence, existence is an illusion? "That to the height of this great argument I may assert eternal Providence, And justify the ways of God to men." Making a God of War. Would it be fair to say there is no evidence, for "The Great War"? or "The Great War Part II"? It's not that people stop believing in something? What do you believe in?

I've been to Utah, Arizona, Colorado, Nevada & California in that particular region of the USA(family holidays). Texas Roadhouse!!! nothing like a nice slab of steak. Visited various places in Colorado: Silverton, Leadville, Colorado Springs, Canon City. @Siegfried von Walheim is a writer. I think it is much more prominent with those with an extroverted temperment.According to "psychological types" by carl jung that the personality test is based on Extorverted temperments are objective, a prominent one being Ayn Rand a prolific writer. As I said, I'm introverted, my thinking is highly subjective by temperment. Have quite a fair bit I could write about, probably post some more tomorrow sometime.

@PT Bergin What country are you from? What about work on the railways? I mean things like track maintenance? Great scenery in places like Canada or the USA. High Openness (Same): Low conscientiousness (Same): Extroversion: (Completely different, Highly Introverted) Agreeableness: (I'm very low in Agreeableness) High Neuroticism: (Same)

Sharpen knives. "I know nothing Mr Fawlty."