barn

Sure, @neeeel

I hope you watched the right interview with Dr. Jonathan Haidt, my linking could have been erroneous (taking you to another one). In any case, if it didn't prove to be correlated, useful to you, I hope you'll find your answers eventually.

I don't know to which you're referring to in your generalisation. I'm bookmarking it (maybe) for later. Unicorns???...hahaha, I think your statement is a strawman. Ok. If you don't think, people have the capacity to change their minds... Unicorns or not (lol)... Aren't you waisting your time with me trying to prove me that the quote doesn't prove the existence of free-will?

Ok. Yes, I'm in fact stating that due to your selective treatment (continuous) of the original quote, I'm thinking that your statements aren't mirroring the starting point but only a distorted version of it. Not sure about "accusing" or "all sorts of"... feel free to make an argument if you want, explaining why I was wrong according to you. We could go about it in several different ways, I'm thinking (amongst other approaches) you could choose to ... 1. Answer to: Say you owned some money, that which you were able to spend on stuff (or keep it, spend some...variations) and could decide yourself if you wanted, what to spend it on, it's your money after all? Is that a good example of free-will? 2. State yourself, why (so far you haven't made ANY supporting arguments, regarding your claim(s)) the quote: Isn't correct, free-will isn't (therefore) a result. 3. Provide a negative of the statement, showing how it's NOT falsifyable. 4. anything else, you choose... ...

Still, you're only looking at it partially. I can't help but experience a growing sensation of intentional disregarding the whole context coming from you. It's dishonest, I think. Please, don't do that. Perhaps, this will help us: Are you still thinking the same?

I didn't quote that "minds can change". Probably you weren't paying attention, it happens.

155. Yoko Kanno - Cradle Song 156. Dusty Kid - Cowboys

"Failed attempt at tainting the well bro..." - Heard myself saying,... after having contrasted Stefan Molyneux's starting line with the callers secondary motivation (hypothetical), for gaining validation of his own ideas by convincing someone on the outside, regardless of the intellectual costs. It's possible, the answer given was insincere but I would rather write it up to just lacking falsifyable principles. A: "Do you think, that I have the capacity to change my mind?" B: "Yes. Obviously, you do." A: "Good. Good, so it sounds like we agree. I think, you have the capacity to change your mind as well, so... Isn't that, kinda' in the free-will park? " B: "Umm... Well,... No, so... and... I eh... GGGOTCHA!!! p.s. simple projecting, wiggling once revealed (some harsh words I'm using, sorry if me not seeing other explanation is the root of that)

@The Invisible Gorilla Thanks.

153. Undisputed Truth - Smiling Faces Sometimes 154. Jamiroquai - Didjital Vibrations

Hi @Mole I guess that's you changing your mind about/discarding military internship... right? If so, good on you! Make it work! Barnsley

The only part, that I guess is somewhat agreeable to me is that it takes time to cultivate friendships. (also, you haven't responded to my other 5 questions, no push just letting you know I noticed)

Huh. So you are in favour of/are pro-state, pro-coercion. Am I correct? May I ask you to describe 'CRAPitalism' ?

Hi @fumigator (is your nick, a variation of 'insect/pest exterminator'?.. mine can be seen as a stable-like structure with animals inside) Nonsense (your idea, respectfully) , while I'm not saying complete dominance of mega-corporations isn't possible... I am having a hard time imaging it being possible, though. (less than 1 to Googol chance) The reason why I think what you are stating is simply erroneous (and pro statist) is because it's evident, where you have more free-market (coercion free), the less things get subsidised to the detriment of the taxpayers/those involved, higher competition means better services all-around and those who wish to not fade away must, have to, need to provide actual (real) value or be outcompeted shortly. (i.e. To name a few things = laser eye-surgery, communication devices, GPS... technologies released out of the decay filled swamps of state power ruled prison) Imagine this. How long would the education sector keep up with it's destructive, ideologue factory like nature, if people would have to pay themselves from pocket for all the fees? How many students would consider taking a social-, art-, women studies degree for the CURRENT, REAL price of those options? ... never mind the soul crushing side effects, leading to childlessness, debts, extensive collection of cognitive dissonances, false and vacuous self-esteem... etc. Who would go to universities, where the value of the certificate they acquired devalued before they even began the first semester (no guarantee to be employed, in a merit based economy people who don't want to provide value wither away) ? How would universities attract students if they couldn't be subsidised? Would there be more, or less practice, field work for students? (consulting the industries on a regular basis, updating the curriculum so that it followed what was actually required to be employed) p.s. Just out of curiosity... Are you in possession of ANY non-coercion based work experience?

Hi @J.L.W , thanks for some added info on some of my questions.

I see. No. How about this?... Office politics isn't free choice. Therefore, I'd say it's more temporary alliances, convenience, politics in general for making the best of what is given within an artificial environment. Friendship (meaningful, true, virtue-based) is different. You can choose what to give, what to accept. Doing so, not because you don't want to dread working at a place where you only have a few individuals (sometimes not even that) who you really get along with. But because you are mostly able to / being your true self, outside of an artificial environment. (True/false self? I'm sure you're familiar with..) Interesting, since how you started out the topic of friendship sounded like being accustomed to = therefore friends. (I haven’t seen you mention values, deeply held or not.) I see your first statement, a description of friendship as getting used to being around certain people. Isn't that what you wrote? Passively, like a leaf in the wind. Unlike choosing... Utilitarian perspective? This is what I meant with the 'business' like mentality. 'You scratch my back...' There's no real risk as the relationship isn't too valuable(though some might grow into something more special, occasionally). In general, those people are 'interchangeable' acquaintances. No strong ties just a sense of convenience. Do you think that's fair to say? No offence taken. (Just, don't be arrogant if you don't want to. Preferably. I believe.) So for you, false/pretentious friendship doesn't exist. + Or, am I correctly assuming that you'd say, shared suffering brings people closer and makes them friends too? (as in: not that it can, but it usually does) Are those, also part of how you see friendship?

I don't think that is basic. It's common rather. What do you think about shared values, admiration, the need to learn from the other as a basis for true friendship? Isn't it acquintance, anything else you have? 'Business' oriented setups, where distances are mutually kept?

(For all the special people in Washington, and here as well!) -152.- Public Service Broadcasting - Go!

150. Yoko Kanno - 7 Minutes 151. Hell Interface - Midas Touch (Midnight Star) Midas (/ˈmaɪdəs/; Greek: Μίδας)

To @Saarang Sahasrabudhe Noted. Thanks.

Many thanks to Stefan Molyneux for bringing it up, I had been waiting for hearing him mention it. - - - - - Do not go gentle into that good night /Dylan Thomas, 1914 - 1953/ Do not go gentle into that good night, Old age should burn and rave at close of day; Rage, rage against the dying of the light. Though wise men at their end know dark is right, Because their words had forked no lightning they Do not go gentle into that good night. Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay, Rage, rage against the dying of the light. Wild men who caught and sang the sun in flight, And learn, too late, they grieved it on its way, Do not go gentle into that good night. Grave men, near death, who see with blinding sight Blind eyes could blaze like meteors and be gay, Rage, rage against the dying of the light. And you, my father, there on the sad height, Curse, bless, me now with your fierce tears, I pray. Do not go gentle into that good night. Rage, rage against the dying of the light. - - - - -

Hi @DavidFoxfire The practical (?) : ° Could/would a 'rule of thumb' amount of time indicated, be helpful as to foretell in what duration an ideal choice should be made within (+/- upon negotiation, but no DM final say) ° Additionally, a simplified framework be drawn up as part of the familiarisation, where players are introduced to such scenarios, initiators should always take into consideration the probable effects on (no hand-holding) - the self - the target - cumulative/one off - physical/magical Very true. I remember, once or twice there were short campaigns to get a feel for, cut off dead weight from characters before 'THE' campaign. (people have a hard time describing their actual taste, unless they're seasoned players) Biblical stories?... Jordan B Peterson? Moral conundrums?

148. The Chaozhou Ensemble - Xiu He Bao(Embroidering a gift to her lover) 149. Betty Carter - Open The Door

True. Adamantium level iron-clad. (1) I suppose, one can't reasonably believe an immovable object could be dislocated, only if it was pushed from the right angle... anxiety. Especially if (the second caller) any grip you might try to hold onto, realigns itself to prevent your each and every attempt. Mortified to be revealed, must be a pitiful existence. It's dangerous to be around such people. (2) Sort of like The Library of Babel,with Immanuel Kant locked up inside somewhere... hehe. I even created a thread, here. Care to take a gander?

Hi @Awood90 I don't think I have the clearest grasp on the subject, so I think it's reasonable to take what I'm about to say with a pinch of salt... The article seems lopsided to me as it greatly eludes to highlight the fact that good friends don't allow for escalation to the point of grave emotional harm being inflicted by either party. I mean, not if they can. Accidents may happen but those are easy to remedy with sharing experiences, working out strategies for creating preferable future scenarios, acknowledgement of experiences with genuine empathy and apologies... so on. Obviously, a good friendship is a huge investment. The way I see it, both parties learn a great deal about each other in the dynamic and that means vulnerabilities... like, 'pretty-please-don't-press-that-button'-s too, if you know what I mean. Like I said, accidents may happen but generally I see it difficult to believe good friends would be obnoxious to the point where they'd do something that's especially hurtful to the other... I find that a pretty big contradiction. Like a mountain sized one, so yeah the article is fairly misleading if you asked me. (I wonder if the author is trying to minimise preferences, shift blame, trying to move the attention of those who... hmm. Why would he do such a thing, if I'm correct?!... ) Huge investment means, several layers, a good grasp on needs (for both, recognition and the ability to communicate those), integrity, principles (especially to one-self)... I'm being a bit abstract here, perhaps. i.e. - actions mirroring words, willing to change behaviour if superior argument is made, respecting boundaries of each other, remembering what the other one said... (any better?) Sorry for saying, 6-12 months is not enough time (I don't see how it could, even if living together be sufficient) in order to lay a strong enough foundation, so that if you moved there would be a strong enough connection to keep the relationship going long-term. Maybe it is, I just never experienced/could achieve that. I'm sorry for your experience, it must be making you feel lonely and frustrated,... Sishyphus A few things: ° You don’t choose, who wants you to be their real friend. (goes the other way around too) ° Real friendship is a big investment, people are afraid to loose such a value (especially if they had been 'betrayed', got disappointed, felt dependent in their past) ° Someone who moves around a lot is bringing to the dynamic a challenge, for starters there's an added difficulty that not many people are capable/willing to embrace. Are you conscious of the fact that you are asking for people to accept that you are moving around a lot? ... Hope that helps, feel free to give a feedback... I think, it is reasonable to take what I've said here, with a pinch of salt. Barnsley