Ok, we will do it then late May. We can keep the original format for simplicity. This topic allows it.
I went with Epicurean philosophy because of the non-determinism. Epicurus was against Democritus’ determinism as it eventually leads to fate (if you are not responsible for your actions, then fate is).
To break fate, he introduced in his particles the “swerve”, an arbitrary movement at unpredictable times. This uncontrolable movement (free motion called by one of his followers), together with causality explains reality. Necessity and chance coexist. Of course there is cause and effect, but how do you link arbitrary phenomena in a deterministic framework?
Somehow, Epicurus connected this idea with free will (unfortunately this part is lost, Lucretius who explains swerve is too brief on how swerve leads to free will). I have my own theory on how it can lead to some kind of free will. I explained it in my first post on this forum.
The point is: this swerve is compatible with what quantum mechanics are claiming today: randomness is a fundamental property of nature. The modern determinists are fixed with Einstein’s physics (who, by the way, was philosophically with Spinoza, close to Stoics), and do not take into account seriously the randomness in nature.
PS Sure, you can connect both swerve and causality to God. In principle, I cannot disprove such position. Neither Stoics’ determinism can. What I reject is divine intervention, i.e. miracles and God interfering in human affairs. Also, afrerlife claims are not based on what we see in the physical world.
Sympathy is not a requirement for understanding the reasoning behind certain actions.
Some view these people with scorn, others with disappointment, yet again others with sympathy.
Personally i prefer to view emotionally charged topics through the clockmaker’s neutrality.
But yes. Reading through your comment i can agree with most of what you wrote in regards of bipartite souls and Solipsists.
The way you frame it is very esotheric, but yes, you did reframe my point accurately and i have to overall agree, and i think we both agree that suicide is not really something positive.
Not in terms of getting there, and also not in terms of the tragic outcome.
People here who are largely unintelligible will call me a white supremacist because I believe white people have the right to exist in having their own cultural identity, but I also believe all people everywhere have a right to exist.
The fact that liberals cannot understand this form of thinking proves how insane they really are.
In theory, that would work: give each race a spot on erf and seal it off. Whitey stays over here, blackey over there, the indians over here, etc. But what happens when whitey’s spot runs out of some resource? Does he dare to start trading with the weird looking race on the other side of the sea? If so, what governs this activity? What are the rules of trade, and who makes them?
Here’s what happens. The ruling class controlling the trading will try to shyst both the trader and the consumer of what resources are traded. The consumer begins to notice this - consumers on each side of the sea - and a class consciousness develops among them. They unanimously agree that they are each getting fucked by their respective ruling class governments. This is the first step in the direction of international socialism. When foreign workers discover they have this fundamental thing in common: they don’t control what they produce.
This will happen, is happening, so nationalism and isolationism are only temporary phenomena. For example, at some point (if zee Nazi’s had won), germany would have been split between its bourgeoisie and its proletarian class, all the perfectly-ever-after nonsense would quickly disperse and germany would be set ablaze with revolution. See, when they’re fighting the Joos together they’re all psyched… but once the war is over they turn on each other.
Folks gotta mix, bruh, and there’s only two ways you can do it. Through controlled means of mobility and integration or through producing a society that creates a class identity so strong in people that cultural differences become irrelevant to them and they take up arms together.
