I believe in creating an environment where all people can thrive and flourish, regardless of their background or circumstances.
I am committed to ensuring that every person has access to opportunities they deserve, whether it be education, healthcare, employment, housing, food security, social justice, environmental sustainability, economic growth, personal development, community engagement, and more - so that we can build a better future together.
1 Like
.
You forgot āpersonal safetyā, for what are all those things without that?
And you forgotā¦happily ever afterā¦
Another angle to consider, for all you hypocritical cowardsā¦
*nice entrance, no?
All those years when you all CHOSE to sit idly by, or you may have cheered on, as the US, āland of the FREE, home of the braveā attacked and sanctioned foreign lands, in your name - because most of you are Americans, or citizens of one of Americaās vassal states - because America was bringing them āfreedom,ā or when the US claimed that the āterroristsā hate Americaās freedomsā¦what definition of āfreedomā were you using?
I canāt imagine that it was the same one youāve CHOSEN to adopt concerning the Will.
No, not so long ago you CHOSE another definition of freedom, didnāt you?
Convenient, no?
Unless you were consistent - donāt think any of you fuckers have any intellectual integrity to be consistent - and what you understood by āland of the freeā was a magical land that exists outside causality, populated by god-like people with no determined pasts ā¦or when you heard that all those resisting āterroristsā envied Americaās freedoms, you must have understood that they envied Americaās god-like independence from need, suffering, from the determined past, from natureās laws.
And why did you not define āpowerā in the same way youāve CHOSEN to define 'freedom."
Give it the same supernatural treatment.
Some of you fuckers, were fanatical Nietzscheans, or Stirnareans, and now you deny āself,ā and your willās freedomā¦so whose āego and its ownā were you harping aboutā¦and whose āwill to power,ā were you proclaiming?
What import has power to a will with no freedom?
It is as powerful as the powerless.
Weāre back to godās will.
Schopenhauer claimed only the WILL was free, because it existed āoutside causalityāā¦like the god of the bible.
Is this what you believe.
Godās Will, minus the āgodā part.
Why optical illusions continue despite knowing how they work? They are artifacts of the perceptual system which determines how we see things. Science teaches us that things are not as they appear.
Why do stage-show magic tricks still seem to work even when we know theyāre tricks? Because the mechanics of the trick are concealed. Analogously the mechanics behind the decisions of the decider are hidden from his consciousness. If we had to consciously decide on all the processes necessary to sustain our life, we would die in a heartbeat.
Cognitive scientists estimate that 95% of thought is unconscious. Focused attention has a narrow bandwidth. It is the tip of the iceberg of our neurophysiology which we have no direct access to. The illusion of free will is maintained by the impossibility of tracking the chain of causes and effects from which our supposed choices proceed in real time.
So, again, free will is a useful fiction in a narrow sphere of common sense social functioning. It falls apart when subjected to scientific scrutiny.
What you describe is a deficiency to completely perceive reality.
Why perceive, at all, if the conclusion is that the perception is illusory?
Youāve concluded that you know that the will is not free, based on your definitions of freedom.
You donāt even say that the will might be partially free, or free within limits.
You say it is not free, using your supernatural definition of freedom.
So, the trickery is in your definition.
If all were determined, then why did judgement evolve?
How do species emerge, if they are not naturally selected?
Consciousness offers no advantage.
Might as well be a stone.
Why would we even have to be tricked into believing we have agency if we have no choice?
Why big brains, that can judge and believe they are choosing?
Why so much wasted energy, if man is no more free than a drop of water in the sea?
Why would the illusion even be necessary if it is all determined?
Meaning, why would perception be necessary?
Meaning why life would even be, if it had no advantages over a lifeless stone?
1 Like
Againā¦you can also negate power, life, knowledge, if you define it in a way that it would be impossible for it to exist, because it contradicts existence.
If I CHOOOSE to define power as omnipotence, then i can claim that we are all EQUALLY impotent, because nobody can ever meet the criteria, Iāve set for power to be a fact.
A way to reduce all to a common-denominatorā¦
We are all EQUALLY ignorant, because I CHOOSE to define knowledge/awareness as omniscience.
All is EQUALLY lifeless, if I CHOOSE to define life as immortal.
No life can meet this criterion, so, a living cat is no different from a lifeless rock.
All is uniformly the sameā¦
Using the analogy of the earthās curvature, we can say that even that is not the complete truthā¦an interpretation of reality, not reality itself.
Whoās to say if round is the earthās shape in multidimensional cosmos?
Round is a human idea. There is no line or square, or any shape in reality.
So, perceptions are categorized by their qualityā¦
You fuckers want equality, parity, so you use a supernatural, the absolute, the Platonic ideal as your standard, reducing all to an all-encompassing uniformity, with no gradations.
Shadows we are of the Platonic idealā¦a fallen state.
All is equally so, because nothing and nobody can ever be this extraordinary, imaginary, supernatural BEING.
We are all sinners, in Biblical terms.
Equally sinful, when compared to godās goodness.
We are all equally proletarians if absolute wealth is the standard.
We are all idiots, if supernatural genius is the standard.
We use a noetic fabrication - an imagined complete wholeness - to declare the existent a uniformity.
We are equally becomnigā¦if we define Being as a complete, perfect, whole - a singularity.
So, if I cannot go back in time and change my choices, or if I cannot have infinite options to choose from, or if I cannot choose to be independent from causality, or outside space/timeā¦if I cannot be a god, then I must be part of uniform impotence.
Christianity really fucked you people up.
Imagine not even being Christian. Ouch.
Ichthus, I donāt know if that was a question for me or what you mean. Did I do some triad thing?
Satyr, what the hell. You post multiple times in succession and I canāt understand why. The points you make are arrogant and self-important and lack basic cogency or structure. Is there any way you could stop doing that? I think it ruins the forum.
I canāt be in a conversation where you post four or five vaguely obnoxious things that sort of resemble an opinion but actually donāt ever actually say anything thatās clear that can be commented on. Itās the most needy and indulgent approach to forums Iāve ever seen and Iāve seen a lot.
How has this been allowed to go on this long? How have you managed to not bore yourself to death? If you like philosophical discussion why donāt you just try to be a little more clear and orderly, and approach it with sincerity? If you have conviction thatās great. But itās coming across more as vandalism than conviction. The result is being tuned out, not because Iām avoiding uncomfortable truths (I love uncomfortable truths and I will literally discourse with anyone about anything) but because I just donāt know what the hell you actually care about or believe other than flinging vague insults, operant word being āvagueā because if they were at least very clear, precise insults I could probably work with that. Are you hiding behind vagueness because you donāt have as much to say as youād want to, and this is the only way to get attention?
Would be so nice if youād just pack up this act and start over and just tell it straight in a way that invites others in. The show is divisive and lacks entertainment value. Itās just devoid of value. I was thinking of coming here more often and leaving Reddit behind but I canāt if this shit continues.
I was replying to this post:
Ah okay.
I donāt bother reading Gamerās post any moreā¦but his moniker is cool and so is his avatar.
From what Iāve read heās a pseudo-intelelctual douchebagā¦
Can someone give me a run down of what nonsense heās spouting now?
Iāve suspended satyr for 1 week. His inability to interact without egregious insults has persisted through numerous bans and suspensions in the past.
1 Like
When will he be eligible for thread parol?
What merits a ban-worthy insult? Why must they be banned? Are the individuals present too sensitive to endure words that you should protect them? Does his input lack value for itās potential to offend? Who determines what is offensive and by what metric?
Iām not specifically requesting a ban, but in defense of someone I donāt necessarily agree with, I do question the validity of this notion of online censorship and personal cancellation. I, speaking alone, would rather hear a meaningful insult than all the useless affirmation in the world.
Insults distract from real arguments, and they make this forum a less enjoyable place to be. Do you not think the moderators of a forum have any prerogative to make their forum enjoyable for their members @WeirdBeard ?
Censorship is about IDEAS. I havenāt censored any philosophical ideas here.
What if we all set about trying to scrape away all the bullshit insults to find the diamond in the rough? I just have this weird hunch there might be one.
Fair enough