barn

(chuckles) Compared to what? see, here with this plus this I was saying that those (imo) who do not consider going into debates with an open mind should be (generally) not engaged, in fact this means you can learn and have productive debates with people who aren't as advanced (yet) in said topic, nevertheless. (i.e. - healthy debate with the opportunity to make your argumentation more effective to people 'starting out', practising. The ever present possibility with such open minded people that they, in their thinking in other aspects might offer you something new, learning from or even formulating a new alliance with them... etc. Goodies.) I don't think you've answered my question. You don’t have to, you are free to decide I just wanted to let you know I noticed.

I generally don't like football/soccer, this could be very well an exception however. Excerpt: "Commentator: [...]... Nietzsche has been booked for arguing with the referee. He accused Confucius for having no free will and Confucius, he say: - 'Name go in bok' And this is Nietzsche's third booking... [...] " Enjoy!

266. Béla Bartók - Allegro Barbaro 49 267. Cujo - The Light

Indeed, I think too that aiming for objective truth is preferable, except when it's about esthetics. (same 'r' (radius) but different positions in the circle is esthetics, greater/smaller 'r' with the will to update thinking is the only group of people who worth engaging/might benefit positively from the interaction) I disagree, having debates with people who are both inferior in their argumentation and not trying to get better is a waste of time in general. Except when defending one's own self or when choosing to exposing the fallacies for the benefit of others. How do you see your earlier example of a debate you'd have ... What group of people are represented here? Furthermore, what is your gain from engaging in debates with them? (I wouldn't but maybe you can help me understand why you would.) Alternatively, Isn't there a risk of you becoming even more rooted in your own beliefs as a result of having entered / allowed them to interact with you, knowing they aren't interested in objective truths, they won't demonstrate intellectual honesty? as in (adapted, changed a bit) : p.s. (Paraphrasing) The truth is a sword that shouldn't be drawn at any cost.

Hi @justokre Have you used the search function of the board? (It's the magnifying glass looking icon) Alternatively, check out podcast 1927. Barnsley

Cool, thanks for the example. A European or an American truck? ... Ok, joking aside... r1, 90kmh and r2, 150kmh - They're both wrong, one is still closer to the truth, it's r1 because (r2 > r1). Fantastic, one of them benefits from the interaction. Now, does the other person who greatly over exaggerated the speed of the truck, also changes its mind, or gets even more confident in its false assumption? (as in, the thinking process: 'if he was wrong and had to change, finally resembling an opinion closer to mine, it must be because I was right the whole time and for him it's just difficult to see the 'truth'... of course the truck goes 150kmh, sooner or later he'll see') I'm asking this (the other side of the coin), because without objective truth, there can't be certainty.

Is it true, that in a circle there are no 'other sides' in general? Another orange circle with green within, located the same 'r' from the centre would be analogous to: yet another synonym for a word which meaning we already knew. (i.e. 1 word but in many different languages, same meaning) If I followed your logic, there are only ESTHETIC differences between the differing subgroups of opinions if they are the same 'far' from the truth. (I normally like to think about it in terms of Venn diagrams some not inclusive or slices some reaching over their parent circle but whatever). In order to get a closer understanding, we need bases of comparisons farther or closer to the centre point. Otherwise, we are only reproducing the same value but in different forms/ways. (4= 1+1+1+1 = 16/4 = 001100100010101100110010) That's only going to solidify what we know, not expand it. MOST IMPORTANTLY, could you please provide a practical example where you demonstrated what you mean? (same I had provided for mine)

This documentary blew my mind... speechless. I would have never imagined. Sure, I suspected, knew that there were 'some' bad apples, but the extent of things, the length and influence these people STILL have is... walking around freely, minding their business, living their lives like they just shrugged it off... seriously, unbelievable. I even checked a few of them. (Marc collins-rector in the Dominican Republic, Brock Pierce who's the director of Bitcoin Foundation resides in Puerto Rico, guess I just avoided another company) How can I go to the movies now? Seriously. I could be contributing to these... these creatures. Books just got so much more appealing. Thank you

264. Rob & Goldie - The Shadow (Bing Here Mix) 265. Hidden Orchestra - Tired And Awake

Sure, people who are open to updating, re-examining shouldn't be ignored. I'm not sure if I understand wholly your metaphor. Isn't a line drawn from the centre of a circle the same length, regardless what direction is it? As in, someone who is the same 'far' from the truth but uses different words to describe the same level of understanding?

The faaaar reaching claws of Patreon or Content police, depending on how you look at it. Stefan Molyneux must have heard about it, Owen Benjamin has been on the show / at the event. Not good.

Sure thing! Any updates, I'll be reading that.

Hi thinkers and alike, I think it is fitting to mention here another word-salad enthusiast's encounter with simple logic, truthful examination. Here's when the 'plate of word-salad being sent back to the kitchen': ° Zeitgeist Versus the Market - Peter Joseph Debates Stefan Molyneux Here's where the 'cook bursts open the kitchen's flying doors and scolds the customer for daring to criticise the word-salad' ° Peter Joseph on Stefan Molyneux: "The Art of Nonsense" | Pathology or Con-Artistry? And over here, 'the customer' explains the dangers associated with 'such bad diet choices', making several solid arguments, presenting proof, adding even more depth (unfortunately for the 'restaurant' previously mentioned, hopefully preventing more 'food poisoning' for others) ° Resource Based Economy: A Critical Examination Good mind expanding, not getting 'food' poisoned. Barnsley

Hi @lorry , @twinklingwinter I'm no programmer but anything I can do to help with the project, let me know. Barnsley

262. Yoko Kanno - Shrilly 263. Flying Pickets - She Drives Me Crazy

Now, that surprised me. Very good on you (I think for acknowledging that. ) That looks like a form of courage to me. What's wrong with being wrong? or What's the upshot in updating your stance/ideas as you move closer to truth? I suppose you have higher ideals in your mind, than what you consider your capabilities currently ripe for. Am I far off? (i.e. - something akin to, in your mind: 'I should have known this') If so, good. Keep going, reformulating. New information, challenges. Incorporate it, work with it. You can always ignore un-constructive (is that a word?) people, contributions as they don't serve understanding or your goal of getting better at it. Me thinks.

I see. It seemed to me (there) that you weren't giving clear descriptions or a background for what you wrote when asked. I thought that was something that might, could, may benefit you if I brought it up. Also, I could be wrong but that's what my idea was for asking. I also want to mention, that I'm not in any fashion extrapolating it to everything you've said or probably are saying elsewhere... I simply don't know enough. Furthermore, I have met people deep-rooted and 'calcified' in their ideologies, it's possible that at your university they are exactly how you described them. It's possible. No probs.

Hi thinkers and alike, scre*YouTube has switched gears and is currently in a semi-open manner purging channels. It's achieving it through putting pressure on MCNs (multi-channel networks), it seems like. (well, ... apart from shadow banning, throttling, fla... etc) ° Youtube Blacklists Offensive Comedy and News Creator - The Youtube Purge Redux Downward spiralling just got a lot faster? Minds accounts opened reaching new records? What once seemed to be a good idea for joining an MCN for extra benefits recently has just vanished / evaporated. Is it, that MCNs, while keeping to their business interests above their partners',... meant to the recently axed channels, including 'wearechange dot org' they were left with no options? Third parties, still must adhere to what the company says, is that why they rather sacrificed those channels, that's it? Could this soon be the reason for us to watch the FDR videos (presence already there) on minds dot com? Some are predicting pooTube won't be around for much longer, have they alienated enough, have they created enough of instability ooor there's more outrageous actions they plan to implement to further increase their velocity in falling ? What's the reason for the crazy parallels between the demise of fecebook and pooTube? Has the tech world gone in-sane?

Hi @Nat. Olivier I'm so sorry, so sorry you have had such a difficult transformation in your life. My amateur view: Do you think, if you had done the best job possible at stabilising your own (!!!) life first, that could then serve as a strong backbone to figuring out anything else afterwards? What do you think about refusing to splitting up your energies and fully committing to 'making sense' of just what the... you've been through? (making sense as in: noticing, observing, separating factual from non-existent without creating narratives just yet) Of course you're welcome, please take quality care of yourself, there's options you have apart from hope. Barnsley p.s (if that's what you wanted, maybe calling in to ask the BCF - big, chatty, forehead)

Thank you. Would you say that that's true the same in the thread you created about 'r/K stuff' ?

Hi @QwertyDavid Just to verify. Are you making concise arguments to them? When they ask or comment, do you clarify things? Barnsley

260. Quiet Daze - The Scenic Route 261. Bob Crosby - Way Back Home

Hi thinkers and alike, Could we use fungal growth to further improve networks? "Biological networks have been honed by many cycles of evolutionary selection pressure and are likely to yield reasonable solutions to such combinatorial optimization problems." Engineers thought, involving Tokyo's Railway Network could be an interesting experiment : Find the source, here It's titled: 'Rules for Biologically Inspired Adaptive Network Design' Good mind expanding, Barnsley

Ok, that's something. I thought, by speaking to him about the different stages/events that happened for him, you could get some insights into the decision making process. What do you think, why did your dad choose the things he did? What did he want to get out of it? How deep his motivation was? What sacrifices did he have to make? What did he think about the job when he started for real (glad/regret)? p. s. (I'm just making sure... while I appreciate, you don't need to /shouldn't be so specific about detailed personal information(place names, people's names... et cetera) , I hope you do know this is a public forum. If you thought those infos were still important, send them privately. I have edited the quotes I took, recommend/ask that you do the same.)

you're welcome, any updates I'll be reading that!