Ungrateful for what you have received. People with extreme ideas usually have adopted them as a reaction to past experiences. If you fail to confont the psychology that is motivating your view of the world then your suffering can only deepen.
prob not for everyone but how about this for a potential solution for some of you sufferers out there on this nutty planet. do some gardening work, it's easy to get. Spend time outdoors but it doesn't have to be really intense work, usually not too exposed, only work on nice days, listen to music and get some exercise (you'll sleep better), you just need a few tools, you'll have plenty of time to think about your own IT projects and you'll be able to clear your head of any rubbish that has been making you feel like crap. you might have to downsize a bit but from my own experience this is a liberating act, like chopping tethers that pulled you in contrary directions.
/hippy
Hey guess what, not everybody is the same as you. Not everybody has the same strengths as you. I have heard many people speak, who like you, talk about how they have made great personal achievements etc from very humble beginnings and like you they are some of the loudest proponents for libertarian values.
What I find perplexing is that the people who most strongly push for the removal of the safety nets
for the bottom of society are often those that have experienced first-hand the grim effects of what those decisions would be like.
Do you want people who are too sick to work to be denied access to health-care?
Why just two extreme choices? Why not a multitude of choices? This is the crux of the issue and your argument reflects the reality of capitalist economies; they usually end up highly polarised. Whether you think this is a bad thing or not generally depends on where you live on the spectrum.
fair point, seems like there is quite a bit of variation in the number of hours people
are getting out of them but nobody seems too bothered by it which is encouraging.
I'm less optimist about humans understanding consciouness, at least not in the short term. I think in the short term (at most 50 yrs) we'll be able to simulate a human brain and prob have human-capable robots but I dont think we'll actually understand how subjective consciousness, self aware-ness, sentience, existing, whatever you want to call it, sprouts out of purely material interactions. It's not that i dont think that there is an answer, more that i just cant even begin to fathom what form that answer might take. Of course if the likes of Ray Kurzweil are correct then we may know a lot sooner. Anyway, i hope im wrong becos it would be an incredible thing to know but at the moment i put it in the same basket as the one that holds questions like; "what caused the universe to come into existence?"
seems we are largely in agreement(slashdot first!). It certainly is a fuzzy area and knowing where to draw the line is difficult, I personally dont eat fish but I do have similar questions with regards to insects, are they merely complicated biological incapable-of-suffering robots? Luckily, eating insects was something i didnt have to give up when i became a vege;-). (Because I never ate them in the first place not because i think they are soul-less unfeeling robots and can therefore remain a staple of my diet!(Although my parents claim that as a toddler i used to sit on the path outside our house and eat slaters)).
can you explain what is wrong with moral relativism?
mate, i think you've got the wrong end of the stick. I never said moral relativism was bad, in fact im a bit of one myself, i was just trying to point out that using the parent's post's logic you can justify anything, such as eating your mum is not wrong, which you can, ie just assume parents are a valid source of nutrition. The point i was (and am) trying to make is that you have to assume somethings otherwise you can't make rational arguments. And the point of that is to make clear that as soon as you make an assumption that, say, higher functioning social mammals quite likely feel pain and have an emotional component to their sentience that I as a human can empathise with then it becomes just as morally justifiable to choose not to eat animals as it does to choose not to eat your own mother.
I dont want to give you the impression that I'm a moral absolutist or religious at all, i am neither.
But I do not buy any moral arguments that killing animals to eat is somehow bad
ooo moral-relativism, follow that logic through and go and eat ya mum, ah but no you have serious digestive problems that prohibit you from digesting most meats and so you couldn't eat your mum, aha! but that argument ALREADY ASSUMES that pain is bad and so is not an argument as such against eating your mum.
now go eat your mum and leave us vegetarian's alone, we don't care for your dreary bletherings.
of Dada21's thinly veiled diatribes about how great libertarianism
is? He doesnt seem to get the contradiction that is him trying to shove it down people's throats.
Slashdot Mirror
your handle is so close to 'KFC' tht I think of it everytime I see one of your posts. Do you like KFC?
Ungrateful for what you have received. People with extreme ideas usually have adopted them as a reaction to past experiences. If you fail to confont the psychology that is motivating your view of the world then your suffering can only deepen.
Why are you so ungrateful? Did your dad not hug you?
Why don't you believe anyone should get anything for free?
prob not for everyone but how about this for a potential solution for some of you sufferers out there on this nutty planet. do some gardening work, it's easy to get. Spend time outdoors but it doesn't have to be really intense work, usually not too exposed, only work on nice days, listen to music and get some exercise (you'll sleep better), you just need a few tools, you'll have plenty of time to think about your own IT projects and you'll be able to clear your head of any rubbish that has been making you feel like crap. you might have to downsize a bit but from my own experience this is a liberating act, like chopping tethers that pulled you in contrary directions.
/hippy
i agree.
Answer the question. Do you think people who are unable to pay for it should be denied healthcare?
Hey guess what, not everybody is the same as you. Not everybody has the same strengths as you. I have heard many people speak, who like you, talk about how they have made great personal achievements etc from very humble beginnings and like you they are some of the loudest proponents for libertarian values. What I find perplexing is that the people who most strongly push for the removal of the safety nets for the bottom of society are often those that have experienced first-hand the grim effects of what those decisions would be like. Do you want people who are too sick to work to be denied access to health-care?
Why just two extreme choices? Why not a multitude of choices? This is the crux of the issue and your argument reflects the reality of capitalist economies; they usually end up highly polarised. Whether you think this is a bad thing or not generally depends on where you live on the spectrum.
fair point, seems like there is quite a bit of variation in the number of hours people are getting out of them but nobody seems too bothered by it which is encouraging.
I'd like to know realistically how long the batteries in those remotes last. Prob too soon to get any good data on that I suppose.
awwh, being alive during the creation of the internet, thats gotta b pretty cool, right? ;-)
I'm less optimist about humans understanding consciouness, at least not in the short term. I think in the short term (at most 50 yrs) we'll be able to simulate a human brain and prob have human-capable robots but I dont think we'll actually understand how subjective consciousness, self aware-ness, sentience, existing, whatever you want to call it, sprouts out of purely material interactions. It's not that i dont think that there is an answer, more that i just cant even begin to fathom what form that answer might take. Of course if the likes of Ray Kurzweil are correct then we may know a lot sooner. Anyway, i hope im wrong becos it would be an incredible thing to know but at the moment i put it in the same basket as the one that holds questions like; "what caused the universe to come into existence?"
seems we are largely in agreement(slashdot first!). It certainly is a fuzzy area and knowing where to draw the line is difficult, I personally dont eat fish but I do have similar questions with regards to insects, are they merely complicated biological incapable-of-suffering robots? Luckily, eating insects was something i didnt have to give up when i became a vege ;-). (Because I never ate them in the first place not because i think they are soul-less unfeeling robots and can therefore remain a staple of my diet!(Although my parents claim that as a toddler i used to sit on the path outside our house and eat slaters)).
can you explain what is wrong with moral relativism?
mate, i think you've got the wrong end of the stick. I never said moral relativism was bad, in fact im a bit of one myself, i was just trying to point out that using the parent's post's logic you can justify anything, such as eating your mum is not wrong, which you can, ie just assume parents are a valid source of nutrition.
The point i was (and am) trying to make is that you have to assume somethings otherwise you can't make rational arguments. And the point of that is to make clear that as soon as you make an assumption that, say, higher functioning social mammals quite likely feel pain and have an emotional component to their sentience that I as a human can empathise with then it becomes just as morally justifiable to choose not to eat animals as it does to choose not to eat your own mother.
I dont want to give you the impression that I'm a moral absolutist or religious at all, i am neither.
Was that juxtaposition intentional?
yeah, it was. I don't like that whole "no pun intended" thing.
I don't think we're smarter than mother nature...
What does that even mean??
But I do not buy any moral arguments that killing animals to eat is somehow bad
ooo moral-relativism, follow that logic through and go and eat ya mum, ah but no you have serious digestive problems that prohibit you from digesting most meats and so you couldn't eat your mum, aha! but that argument ALREADY ASSUMES that pain is bad and so is not an argument as such against eating your mum.
now go eat your mum and leave us vegetarian's alone, we don't care for your dreary bletherings.
Well done you for hi-jacking another forum. Twat.
of Dada21's thinly veiled diatribes about how great libertarianism is? He doesnt seem to get the contradiction that is him trying to shove it down people's throats.
oh kind and gracious corptocracy; your infinite generosity fills me
with an obsequiousness that knows no bounds.
Very sorry to hear you are going down the shitter.
Yours sincerely,
rest-of-the-world
P.S can i have your stereo?
i think im falling in love with you
of course you wouldn't, you're too apathetic
spoken like a true arsehole.