barn

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.  I think that's a very good description for helping me understand that, thanks. Perhaps, it was best then if I rather waited for you to make any changes that might come to you, should you decide to make them later. I have occasionally those moments too, most times however I try not to post stuff including too 'brainy' things then, because from personal experience let's say 'they don't come out the way I can consistently agree with' the next day or so. I'm ok with you first revising (if you choose), seeing if you wanted to add or edit something...

@smarterthanone Probably you won't be surprised when I mention that you posting about your situation, the way you did it on a public and (!) Philosophy forum (though not necessarily always philosophical in nature) is in no way can be described as NOT pre-meditated (further proof as well, the structure you'd used to introduce the topic) . What was/is your chosen preference and goal for posting? (I haven't seen you spell it out and prefer to ask than guess)

Absolutely, I understand. Wouldn't wish 'that' even on my enemies. Think along the lines of 'normalise' as not re-learning to tie your shoe-laces... (Only because Velcro wouldn't work as an example ) btw - Am I accurately sensing that your tone is a bit on the grumpy side of things? 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).  Hahaha... yeah, sounds weird when you put it like that. Still, I think the gist isn't too far off. Plus I agree on, 'why waste time and opportunity cost'. Mind you, some are better observers, communicators, clear on what their origin & direction is than others. It's always 'compared to what', I think. Sounds reasonable, right? Appreciate the insight, thanks. What would you say if I asked you whether, apart from existing limitations like genetics and personality (largely genetic, crazy stuff we learn... ) How much imprint have you assimilated from your family history in regards to perception of women, 'a woman'? (same again, open ended, curious...)

Hi thinkers and alike, It's been mentioned a couple of times on the show, thought it might be just as well more accessible to a greater number of people... plus it's getting increasingly important to remind ourselves. I found the story (real) to be undeniably fascinating and deeply insightful. "Of Elephants and Men" - Wade Horn, PhD "Some years ago, officials at the Kruger National Park and game reserve in South Africa were faced with a growing elephant problem. The population of African elephants, once endangered, had grown larger than the park could sustain. So measures had to be taken to thin the ranks. A plan was devised to relocate some of the elephants to other African game reserves. Being enormous creatures, elephants are not easily transported. So a special harness was created to air-lift the elephants and fly them out of the park using helicopters. The helicopters were up to the task, but, as it turned out, the harness wasn’t. It could handle the juvenile and adult female elephants, but not the huge African bull elephants. A quick solution had to be found, so a decision was made to leave the much larger bulls at Kruger and relocate only some of the female elephants and juvenile males. The problem was solved. The herd was thinned out, and all was well at Kruger National Park. Sometime later, however, a strange problem surfaced at South Africa’s other game reserve, Pilanesburg National Park, the younger elephants’ new home. Rangers at Pilanesburg began finding the dead bodies of endangered white rhinoceros. At first, poachers were suspected, but the huge rhinos had not died of gunshot wounds, and their precious horns were left intact. The rhinos appeared to be killed violently, with deep puncture wounds. Not much in the wild can kill a rhino, so rangers set up hidden cameras throughout the park. The result was shocking. The culprits turned out to be marauding bands of aggressive juvenile male elephants, the very elephants relocated from Kruger National Park a few years earlier. The young males were caught on camera chasing down the rhinos, knocking them over, and stomping and goring them to death with their tusks. The juvenile elephants were terrorizing other animals in the park as well. Such behavior was very rare among elephants. Something had gone terribly wrong. Some of the park rangers settled on a theory. What had been missing from the relocated herd was the presence of the large dominant bulls that remained at Kruger. In natural circumstances, the adult bulls provide modeling behaviors for younger elephants, keeping them in line. Juvenile male elephants, Dr. Horn pointed out, experience “musth,” a state of frenzy triggered by mating season and increases in testosterone. Normally, dominant bulls manage and contain the testosterone-induced frenzy in the younger males. Left without elephant modeling, the rangers theorized, the younger elephants were missing the civilizing influence of their elders as nature and pachyderm protocol intended. To test the theory, the rangers constructed a bigger and stronger harness, then flew in some of the older bulls left behind at Kruger. Within weeks, the bizarre and violent behavior of the juvenile elephants stopped completely. The older bulls let them know that their behaviors were not elephant-like at all. In a short time, the younger elephants were following the older and more dominant bulls around while learning how to be elephants."

575. Sounds From The Ground - Blink 576. Jeff Mills & The Montpellier Philharmonic Orchestra - Gamma Player (RX J0806.4-4123 amongst the 'magnificent seven')

"This summer, Spain became the main entry point for migrants crossing into Europe. As of early September, more than 35,000 people crossed into the country either by land or sea, surpassing other leading entry points and topping Spain's own total for all of 2017, according to the United Nations' International Organization for Migration." As in, ~roughly: 80% down in Italy, 350% up in Spain ref. link (npr)

573. Boards Of Canada - Dayvan Cowboy 574. Tame Impala - Expectation

Hi @richardbaxter I'm still going through the massive update you've provided, maybe it's there... so, I apologise for being impatient but if you don't mind I'd like to know: How extensively have you looked into twin-studies?

@PillPuppetPoet From what I've seen, I'm convinced that your intentions are coming from a constructive place rather than anything else. It's ok to be less than perfect. (perfection is an impossible standard, designed to paralyse... Just discard it being the only option.) I'll be tuning in, listening curiously to the both of you, when it happens. All things in their due time... I just hope it won't take years... preferably and it's completely up to you guys! Have a good day, today as well!

Is that everything you wanted to add?

Hahaha... c'mon, be serious man! I have been on the forum for a couple of years and until two months ago I had been at a good standing (around +30). I haven't seen anyone singled out so methodically not before, nor since... but of course, never with any argument just arrows, so I don't care (others experiencing shouldn't neither) about those. The vast majority (from what I recall) are single votes... and there's a ton of votes on music one after another, though they're different styles. (only 10-15maybe in a thread with 300+ posts, c'mon...) Or would you say greeting someone is worthy of downvoting? Or when I quote someone saying something to confirm I properly understood... what a terrible thing, right?! c'mon man, seriously? You think that? I don't think you are being honest here, due to examples above. (look it up if you don't believe me) You know that arrows aren't arguments(?) and that no matter how many arrows (be it either type) that does not reveal any substance. I can imagine a whole lot of reasons. One being, them (1-2 ppl) acting cowardly or inept, WITHOUT intellectual integrity or curiosity. I think these last traits are essential to philosophy, but I can see it isn't the same for everyone. So what? It's their choice not mine (apparently has been yours too). I don't mind a few people being afraid/childish, but I won't just sit there and self-censor. I am not like those people. Hence why you're reading this, right? Plus, accusations from someone who (wink-wink) isn't providing proof, nor when called out is ______. You do know that you still haven't made any reasoned argument with some proof at least...¯\_(ツ)_/¯. (as in: calling you out earlier) It's up to you. Even now. That part has always been. People are what they repeatedly choose. So are you, so am I.

Hi @moatdd Thanks for taking the time in responding, thinking about some of the ideas! Many, many of your experience resonates closely with my observations, way of thinking. It does look like (to me), you could have benefited from more free-market style immersion. And that probably you took/take your work seriously enough to care about quality more than the average does. A. Think of just the falsely projected fuel crisis. We didn't run out of resources, what's more we're better able to not just refine but extract from the ground than ever before. Similarly, this issue too could be prepared for, seeing it down the road just like the example I have made. A trend doesn't mean its effects can't be adequately countered with, should there be sufficient incentive to enable the necessary preparations/updates. Also, better communities, more non-governmental (or restricted) charities could do miracles in a much more economically efficient manner. B. Yes. Actually, the same goes for higher up in the IQ scale (up to about 100-115), I even created a thread on a very similar subject. ie. - banking too, production in general, some areas of healthcare it's been / will be going on, not to mention the vast majority of admin jobs that could/should be restructured (some estimate it to ~70-80% seats at work taken up, wages paid unnecessarily, ALREADY) C. / 1. Illusion - ie. - bubble. Not good. Further detachment from society, less exposure to incentives on learning basic social cues, improving integration. Growing group of unproductive people that has to be cared for. There'll be people included, who otherwise could do other things. (similar to people on social benefits that otherwise could at least be self-sufficient but they choose not to out of various reasons) / 2. The left in my estimation is very bad at looking after people's interest... compared to others. It would be great for them if they could outsource an even greater amount of people, the costs associated to people who shouldn't be carrying that load in the first place. (higher amount of tax being diverted, increase in the loss of opportunities for the productive, higher opportunity costs) Therefore, perhaps you would agree with me when I say: Let's NOT have more, please! Because what you incentivise, grows. Becomes progressively accessible to a greater amount of people, parallel with its former boundaries becoming less clear-cut, inclusivity expanding. (normalisation -> outcome, more of the base -> more of the later except in here it's more hyperbolic... x^2) I don't think that's true. Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems similar to: 'When cleaning the house, let's brush the dog-hair/fallen fur under the carpet, it won't bother anyone there... ' As in: (fallacy) 'Out of sight, out of mind.' I can't disagree here. Makes perfect sense to me. (sigh) Only if we could keep the Internet free and unshackled.

Sure man, as you see it fit!

Currently, I'm unable to reference case studies that aren't biased or incomplete (in my estimation) if that's what you would like to see. However... The many points I made should give you a good idea on why it's not the best idea, strong arguments (to me) . I'm sure it does to you, why else would you choose to be with her. Right?! (just agreeing, casually) Sorry, 'the dealer has run out of the enchanted deck, regular cards it is I'm afraid.' Like, the same for everyone else... (I'm no believer of magic, science person 'n all... ) No, I mean seriously and realistically. I am not with her because she is wise, I am with her because she "gets it". Which is wise for her age for sure. There are tons of 30 year old women who don't "get it". This looks evasive. No problem. (as in: I was curious what you thought of the correlation) In what way? Teens are having sex far earlier than ever before. It's actually difficult to even find a virgin dating as young as I do. Most girls are losing it around 14 now. So practically, Stefan and the science says to go for a virgin, practically I think its impossible unless you date super young or join an ultra conservative religious group.  Two things. a. "In what way?" - maturity wise (especially a person who would be with someone +15yrs older, to me at least) b. Sure, and it's true (I can see from various objective sources, second hand correlations). There's an increase in teenagers risking more, and are in general less aware of the consequences of their actions. Still, it's not what I was asking you. No problem. In fact , I hoped to highlight and ask your take on how much difference is between the attitude towards sexuality among the two groups. It's not what I asked. No problem. + Would you be also ok with a +15yrs old marrying your future daughter? (I couldn't figure out, seemingly you've not mentioned age amongst your preferences here at all) Oh, one more thing... I recommend that you go back to the thread you've mentioned and look for 'that part' again. What do you think? Have you changed your mind on this specific point? Just basic logic. Different friend groups, cultural background (at least one degree of separation, similar to coming from different parts of the world though less) , preferred activities, level of maturity... etc. A pretty, young, good looking girl next to a visibly much older guy (Maybe you're an 8, maybe you're handsome but still) ... you won't wonder (more than 'normal' couples would) about being out of place when people assume you're his uncle, repeatedly? And that she's about to enter her sexual prime, in 7-8 yrs? (Maybe you're a high earner, even then, hypergamy coupled with physical fitness will eat into your realtionship I'd assume.) Inception? - sorry, I didn't mean 'that' Not that old? No, you are not that old, yet. Nevertheless, you will be. You will be, sooner than you think. 17, 32 (now) 32, 47 (when she gets to your age) sorta like, for you 1/3 lifespan left, 2/3 for her Most done in this century are not done for traditional values. So I wouldn't count those relationships as having any similarity. The main purpose of an age difference is for the children. If the couple doesn't have children, they were only doing it for sex/money. Obviously important for making children and living a happy life but to focus on them as an end in itself is selfish and disgusting. And who is jealous of who or envious of who? That's not what I asked, but now I realised I could have been leading with my question... The point I would like to make here is that if your partner is still actively into going out, travelling, meeting new people and all that... that's, that is a source of tension. Obviously people are different but it seems to me straightforward that the majority of people roughly speaking go through very similar epochs during their lifetime. Maybe you and her are exceptions. It's possible. She is wise enough to listen to what I have to say and use my wisdom to supplement her own.  Sorry for being more blunt than usual : Is this relationship about all the things you want from a relationship? She is assertive. She is also smart enough to listen to me and trust what I say when I speak from experience. An example: She had a social situation with friends she shared with me and I gave my experience and she disagreed but realized I had been in that situation countless times so she decided on her own to try it my way and it solved the problem for her.  Well, ok. How shall I put it... Assertiveness to me is to take things through. Not necessarily being successful but instead seeing an idea manifested as closely as possible to its initial form. That does NOT include changing midway due to outside influence. Also, I had asked 'how important it is' ... you've not answered that. No problem. I don't specifically notice it too much. However I just saw one of my friends posts on Facebook about their parents being a couple since she was 13 and he was 19. Which is not as much of a difference but she was very very young and the post was about how they are still married now I think 56 years later. I also know one family with I think a 17 year difference and they have a ton of kids and have been together over 20 years. I've known shitty quality men though to date younger women and they only do it because they can pretend to be higher quality than they actually are. But I am not a shitty quality man looking for some sex, so I don't really count those relationships as being what I would be a part of.  For me, this would be not enough of a reference base to even start to try to draw some observations from... could be just me. Would you like to know more about how couples have done in similar situations? It doesn't mean the same is going to be true for the two of you but I'm sure you two could learn a lot of important things. Has she done any research into this? Obviously not the same because its not the same. I will say she isn't the most attractive girl I have ever dated but she is still very pleasant looking and guys would certainly still check her out and such. So I am not into her because she is the hottest thing I ever saw. But I feel even more intense attraction to her because I see relationship material in front of me instead of someone I am slightly disgusted by who happens to be smoking hot. I always thought I cared about physical attractiveness but damn, its not nearly as important as I thought.  "I always thought I cared about physical attractiveness but damn, its not nearly as important as I thought. " - Word. I assume then, you would for certain stay with her should her attractiveness diminish abruptly... Is that correct? (ie.- an 8,7 -> 5-6) Traditional values? Women should have kids and men should protect, provide and lead their household. Sounds fine to me.  The question was open, non-specific in the areas of interest... Though don't see how your answer is relevant to couples with a 14yrs+ age difference. (Maybe you did, I can't tell) Well that sucks when you put it like that. But you really can't plan your deaths this far out. She would have plenty of kids and grand kids to keep her occupied I would imagine. I would like about 10. And if they average 2 kids per which is low I think coming from very traditional parents, thats 20 grand kids and 10 kids + their spouses so 40 people she can be involved with. Even if all she did was write birthday and graduation cards out that would be a part time job! lol.  C'mon maaan, "when you put it like that"... I was just trying to highlight an essential quality of the relationship you're choosing... it's part and parcel. I don't think I'm able to argue against future wishes, it'd be silly from me. My point is the image you see in front of your mind's eye when thinking of (in the best scenario I must add) the father disappearing 20 YEARS BEFORE. Probability assessment (talking to an investor :-p) is no sealed envelope but it's what makes smart people reduce their exposure to likely future bad consequences ahead of time. +Luck. (or in other words, randomness) My family is very small because nobody had kids. So basically its just my parents to worry about and I know they are like ehhh because they imagine me with some business woman or lawyer and having two kids but at the end of the day they really don't care providing I just start having damn kids sooner than later. Both our families are quite small so if we were to continue as a couple and have lots of children we would become the center of the family for both our extended families.  I'm sorry to hear that. Big families usually are more fun, support, 'headaches'. Ok. Almost. India mainly but the middle east too. Yes, I'm aware of the age at which families used to be created was lower... the further you go back in time, the greater the age gap. Plus until monogamy was wide spread... I know. It's not that. And I also agree with your suggestion of 'swiftly catapulting certain ideas straight out through the window' (not that certain elements of feminism aren't contributing positively to society, well definitely not any of the 3rd wave... anyhow). It's that I don't think she has the capacity or life experience to accurately conceive the ramifications of a relationship with someone ~14yrs older AT AGE 17. Annnd, I think it would be the same 'unknowable' for girls in India or the middle east per se. The thing is, over there it's not nearly as easy to get separated or divorced. Not sure what you mean exactly by 'letting out' but I gauge it to be extensive detachment from responsibilities... I think it's being over-done, yeah sure. Feminism (in my mind) should be helping more to keep a healthier balance. Women aren't 'keeping an eye' on each other nearly as much as it would be preferable (spike in single motherhood, women in general are getting more depressed, economic load and low ROI in increase of higher education takers, less quality time being spent with offsprings... etc and their obvious consequences we see manifested) Remembering the traditional values of the family unit would surely help to improve many things (reverse some current trends) I get that too. It just seems (to me), you're 'going back' not decades, instead centuries in time. A bit too much. (still, you two could be rare exceptions) I liked how you did look at it from various angles. Maybe it's me but the society in which large age gaps was normalised is distinctively different from today's world. Living a life similar to what it used to be would be impossible today. 'Amirite' ?! Let me add @smarterthanone it's good on you for having gone through the points (had the best intentions) and thanks for replying so I can understand your thinking better. Wishing you all the best! (no, seriously) I hope you will be adequately smart and empathetic about things when you have to. (not suggesting anything else here)

1. seeking approval is neutral in its essence a. role of virtue b. role of awareness c. role of choice 2. chosen, partial dependence is better than non elected, or total reliance. I think that 'seeking approval' is a natural and very important trait of humans. Similar to being receptive to incentives, it too can be a 'double-edged sword', meaning the interaction with it can have completely different outcomes for the individual and those involved, according to what decisions people make, keep making. I think a preferable use/experience of seeking approval is when the person does so towards things, concepts, other people that are virtuous, morally sound. Naturally, the more truthful those assertions, the better. I'm unable to see, how people that are described by those qualities (truthfully) would ever willfully misguide, withold praise in general. It's quite the opposite, they'd be the ones giving the most important and helpful feedback usually, as the virtue is shared. As in an example...Let’s say that I absolutely loved being called a 'good builder' by others who I had truthfully established to be 'good builders' themselves. I seek the approval of those individuals, in the process assimilating, developing, mimicking those traits by effort and comparison. Because in my value system there's the clear incentive for my conscience to be proud of my real achievements, I would be acting against my self interest in not taking their recommendations seriously, the least if I didn't listen. I would be self-sabotaging. Seeking those individuals ' approval is therefore a positive. And so those people, seeking approval WITHOUT having checked for the things I had mentioned are basically putting themselves into harms way, allowing for various degrees of risks. Worse still when seeking approval of the clearly non-virtuous-, lacking merit individuals. It's delusional, it's for a payout that only exists really in their imaginations. (unexamined, like : Stockholm syndrome, 'Simon the boxer'... etc) A variation of this could be seeking approval of people with merit, however not cutting slack for own achievements independently (as in: complete dependence,) caveat : I don't think no dependence is good. About dependence: For example if I claim to care for, love others that's a form of chosen dependence. That's basically the short version of my rule of thumb here.

Ah, ok. Would you like to know my take on it?

That doesn't really help me. I'll have to ask again, bit differently. Is your distinguishing criteria 'seeking approval' or not?

I think too, you made your point unequivocally. If a man (or women, in my mind too) doesn't act the way you had described even in the presence of the very same conditions, why do you think that was? ie. - being called nice doesn't affect him (or w...) the way you put it.

It will but I don't think I'm the right person to go into the details of it. Do Americans consume, trade with intellectual produce of Europeans? If the answer is yes, so is to your question. Also, think about server parks (amazon) and intelligence, and banking and research/development... everything will be affected or at least it's uncertain to what extent, how or when... not a great enticer. (cynically put) Probably, after a certain point... it was best if Europe got rejected from the Internet and had to create its own. (At least, that's where things are heading currently.) It would fix things on the long run (more volatile hard-slamming-Europe into the ground) ps. - That was 'cold', maan.  I think your assertion (?) is incorrect, given the sources, one example would be this. (Not to mention banking, R/D, international branches having to undergo structural changes, educational programs, server parks, intelligence gathering... etc. Though in my mind the greatest and near impossible to calculate loss to not just Americans is the vast burning away of 'opportunity costs'.)

 I can walk you through it if you wish.  My thinking was&is: we can only really begin to understand ideas with the limitations they're encased in. Public or Private message, post I'm fine with either. So would I. I'm not sure the concept can apply here.  'Fire away!'

Gotcha. Wasn't sure. No worries. ... Maybe it's the final conclusion of a veeery long chain of arguments I have no way of seeing. I would be curious though to know, what do you hold as 'standard of disproof'?

Hi @moatdd (Thanks for the pm, I'll do as I said. Nice one!) Splendid, I think you will find the following conversation pertinent and helping you see more details. Highly recommend it: (Haidt/Lukianoff/Peterson) ps. - It speaks to me regarding Western culture / mentality and minds rather... or at least it expands on near identical markers, outside of Americans (Northern, I suppose).

Why ask when the information is readily available? Haven't you listened to the calls?

Hi @MahtiSonni Not sure if you listened to the segment + the context. Did you listen? (there's also a link in my op)

570. Donald Byrd - Kofi 571. Thallus - End Of The Sky 572. Herbie Mann - Consolacao