Wouldn’t that make men more to blame? Indeed, only to blame? Making the problem not at all with women?
But if women are choosing conspicuous consumption aggression, then they too have a choice, don’t they.
The truth is of course that neither men nor women have free will. Still, it may make sense to say that there are two possible states for (straight cis) men, whereas there’s only one possible state for (straight cis) women.
If a man sees that women have only that one state (one “choice”), why would he want to “be with” them? Still, he may use conspicuous consumption aggression, not to get sex but to get back into his second possible state.
Would you have been able to finally admit it if you weren’t so desperate to see a pair of breasts? Would you be able to see the truth if it didn’t hurt you?
I don’t have good days. I always know that no matter how good I may be feeling that I’m in a hell realm.
Now, if I can marionette a philosophic zombie universe with my highest self to my aspect specifications; I’ll always have good days.
You are correct that people can’t conceive of freewill if it doesn’t exist in some way.
Women are like lysistrata but in reverse:
They refuse sex unless the men war (no means yes problem). I actually don’t have a problem with women anymore. This species will die because of the no means yes / sex dimorphic / approach escalation / partner stratification problem.
It will be the men who destroy it.
Religions are just one big war being fought by men.
Then you have movies in popular culture like the stepford wives.
Movies and television don’t even have exceptions to this pattern, it’s astounding that make believe doesn’t have a single clean sexual selection!!!
I guess it’s just too improbable. Nobody would believe it.
My personal take is that my intelligence is my most ornate quality. As is humor. I’ve dialed it back a lot.
I’ve realized my teaching causes too much pain in others. Councilors I meet and stuff.
I’m moving more towards not teaching, but doing.
Even though my teachings would have vastly helped me when I was younger. I’m starting to realize as I get older that I’m a freak of nature.
Nice. “Doing” shows you if your teaching is “hot” or “cold” and where it needs adjustment—but not in a way that compromises self=other… there are little ends/consequences which do not nullify big Ends/the grandsequence.
#science
I’ll be your crash taste smarty. With I.D. I’ve never knowingly been the subject of a legit science experiment before. Nevermind the small sample size. Consider it proof of concept.
Is this a “God exists because existence is a basic ingredient of perfection” type argument?
In any case, one does not conceive something in one’s language; one conceives it in one’s mind. And free will is not even a concept, because it’s inconceivable. Therefore, it’s a conceit.
“Willing: A pressing feeling, very agreeable! It is the accompaniment of every effusion of force.” (Nietzsche, workbook, supposedly from Autumn 1883; my translation.)
a feeling before it is named is just a preconceived notion
lol jk i dunno what i’m saying
anywhayz
Ec,
this may be in the wrong (or belong in more than one) thread…
take responsibility that IS yours
DON’T take responsibility that is not yours
DON’T refuse responsibility that is yours
refuse responsibility that is NOT yours
codependent relationship is unbalanced responsibility
privileges come with responsibility
you own responsibility, not people
they have to own their own responsibility
to own more than your share is to take from others
now…
that means sharing responsibility in a balanced way
consensually (in agreement)
and holding up your end of it (promise basic)
deliver extra (“benefits”…) only if you’ve met basic and allowed others to meet basic
Well. As far as freewill is concerned, I’m a compatibilist.
Anyone can say “I don’t exist”. That doesn’t mean non existence of them exists.
I call these conceptual illusions.
When you’re looking at proof through contradiction in any field, you need to prove it to the point where if it’s false, existence couldn’t exist.
Now this causes a very interesting condition in the human species.
Men are judged for the number of times they can contradict themselves and still exist.
You have to solve words and context like a math formula /proof…
The more contradictions a man can ornately display makes him more fit as a partner for women. It’s the psychological equivalent of being a billionaire.
This will destroy the world.
This is why philosophy doesn’t get very far.
Women select against it.
All joking aside. Women blackmail all men with anti intellectualism in order to offer their sex to that man.
I only like contradictions that are meant humorously (and not malicious attempts to see if I’ll buy or notice), and someone who says you can’t reason good arguments about God’s existence … is unattractive as a partner. They have to have redeeming qualities that counteract the repulsion. Otherwise I’ll give basic self=other, but no “benefits”.
Blackmail with antiintellectualism? What does that even mean?
In the Liberal-Left sense of Free-Will, which means “freedom from all morality/responsibility/shame”, the average Western woman has more free-will than you Ecmandu.
Women are rarely, if ever in their lives, held to moral accountability like men are.
You have to distinguish between female empowerment in the west to female slavery everywhere else.
I think there’s a thread in rant about what women’s lib accomplished.
The whole species got to see the female animal in the wild.
We already know women don’t have to do anything to get laid. Men put no selective pressure on women.
But it was a very interesting demonstration for the world to see what really makes a free woman tik.
What was discovered is tall men with big dicks and lots of money. Evolutionary theorists have tried to figure out why women stratify sex so severely with no intent of having a child with that 10% of men who get 90% of the variety sexually.
There are no answers to this other than that women are insane.
The LAST thing you want to do in a sex dimorphic species is give 10% of the population all your sex without reproductive interests.
That will cause violence and further oppression of women and their offspring.
One little known statistic is that women by far commit most of the domestic violence, not men.
Ichthus. If you’re a 90 year old hag and had to find a man to fuck you in 24 hours or be shot dead, you would survive.
Under this type of pressure, almost all men would be shot dead.
You’re delusional.
Women have zero selective pressure.
This gives them low self esteem. To compensate for that low self esteem they invent a game (overcompensate) that doesn’t actually exist to make themselves feel valued. The game isn’t real. It’s just in your head.
If I were 90 & could easily find a man to keep me from getting shot, I would SELECT someone who could trick that stupid gunman & be emotionally available to me… or, I would tell the gunman to just go ahead and … ya know.
No. I’m not crazy. It’s just that in real life, you have no selective pressure as a female. You respond with histrionics and deflection to make my point.
You’re trying to justify your fitness. Men don’t care about things like that.
You know it’s true. You could fuck in 24 hours even if you’re a 600 pound 90 year old hag.
Sometimes I ponder if men are doing women a disservice by not having standards …. A form of evolutionary abuse to make them all stupid.
Very simply. Women do not have selective pressure in terms of sex or intellect.
When I saw women as real people, I was furious at them. Then I came to understand that they’re mentally and emotionally handicapped.
It’s not funny anymore to make fun of retards.
There was a time when retards were funny. Now that it’s known that women are retarded and it’s destroying the species and has cosmic implications…
You’re contradicting yourself. You said women have no freewill…but they hold all the cards when it comes to sex. Therefore, women CAN freely-will to have sex with just about any men they want to.
So which is it, Ecky, freewill when it comes to sex, or not?
It’s usually a net positive for women that men don’t hold them accountable for much if anything in life…because they are the child-birthers, the mothers, our mothers. They’re not supposed to have selective pressure against them.
Man > Woman > Child. Women are gifted this ‘innocence’ and moral unaccountability by men, BECAUSE of sex.
Women only accept approach escalation in a sex dimorphic species. That causes the no means yes problem. On top of that they have no selective pressure.
