Milky Jade

You do? So should we get rid of it? Another question: What is the root of all money?

See, the strange thing about people's dislike, blame for, obsession with, and scrutiny for money is that I can never get them to state just why exactly they feel that way. Do you think money is evil?

@@StormBolt24, A government has its proper functions. But I asked you in which way they are making money? The government costs you money, sure, but they don't need that much to properly function. The one who decides what? What other things?

You don't trust the american government because of money? And because money is bad somehow? What does the government have to do with making money?

Well, yeah, it does if you think murder cannot be justified and basically take the law to a meaningless extrapolation. It also does if you think that half the world is out to stab someone's elses eyeballs. Here is what I think: If anyone initiates force, you're within rights to act out as much force as it needed to lay down the initial threat. That is to say, you may shoot a mad axe-man in the head if it would prevent an innocent person from being halved. Ideally, you should only use as much force as is needed to lay down the compulsion. Realistically, a little bit more than that is needed. Now, how does "an eye for an eye" tune in? The mad axe-man has already halved your friend: Because you have nothing to gain from shooting him anymore, now, after your friend's removal, you lost all your right to shoot the axe-man. And if *that* isn't going to make the whole world blind (read: halved), then I don't know what is. I see it's a bit of an absurd example, but that kind of mistake *does* happen.

A very scatterbrained thread: something I thought I should feel right at home in! Wait, what's that? Haven't I left the other thread exactly because of appeals to credulity á la carte (i.e. Near Death Experiences, Conspiracy Theories etc.) Maybe this is kind of an intrinstic property of these forums? Begad! ..... Hanyway, I don't mind posting this again. I have my own little secret pyramid of priorities, but a good step-into is always a pinch of "NDE is bullshit", because that's clearly what (part of) this thread is lacking:

Off the top of my head 'Tis now the very (be)witching time of night, where churchyards yawn - and hell itself breathes out: contagion to this world. Something shakespearian, obviously.. I don't know where exactly it came from. And an all time favourite, because it serves as a potent reminder that autochthonous principles are often so very foreign to the ones that actually work to remove our problems: In any compromise between food and poison, it is only death that can win. In any compromise between good and evil, it is only evil that can profit.

Yeah, me neither: I think the word you're searching for is something different. But it's definitely not "apathetic", since your elaborate plan which followed immediately after should leave no doubt as to it registering on an emotional level. And that's the opposite of what apathetic means! Maybe you and I can find a better word.

I think the question "what makes a good parent?" implicitly contains "what makes a person good?", and the only things left to be resolved would be "what are the prerequisites for raising a child properly" You basically want to raise your child to be able to make as many free choices as they can for themselves without them steering out of control. It's your job to steer the second wheel and pull the safety brakes. And that's all, I think... the question as to what makes a person good is deserving of an entire thread of its own dedicated to the question, so I will leave it there..

I'd let nefelpitou kill my family and consider it an honour seriously though, hammurabi's law

I don't wanna play devil's advocate, but you realize that modern medicine and technology, architecture, I could go down the line, are all products of science and/or the scientific method? If you do, good If you don't, ask your friend that one question again, but this time keep my post in mind.. EDIT: Well, I was going to bring my 2 dimes in text form, but is there really to say? If friendship doesn't exist because your alleged friends are caustic douchebags, then yes, a friendship between you doesn't exist. Friendship is not about sacrificing yourself for the other one. Love and friendship are based on the same principles. What many people call "mutual interest", I like to call "having the same values", which is key to any relationship, whether of two friends or two lovers. Washing each other's hands in turns but actually have no interest whatsoever in the other person is not a friendship. It's a trade. It's businessmen coming to an agreement. And a not so uncommon thing for businessmen to occur is one getting screwed over by the other. Deplorable? Reprehensible? Maybe. But don't for one second think that you've been in a genuine friendship. You couldn't say something more regrettable about yourself, after all.

Well, repeating yourself doesn't really make it true.. Think like: Walking in the nude doesn't make people think "what a weirdo" anymore. But you're still nude, you're still walking in public, and people are still staring at you. Do people want to weigh this information against the nice feeling of being naked? Do you really think that the only reason we're covering our bodies is because there is this deep-rooted belief that you'll be an outcast if you didn't? Social norms prevent people from doing things in public. It has never stopped them, nor has it made them feel embarrassed. I specifically stated it like this because people do care what others think, and telling them "it's a meaningless emotion #yolo" isn't going to get rid of it. You have to first understand an emotion in reference to yourself. What is ultimately creating that shame depends on your values. How should I put it? Think... yeah, think about spheres. Everyone has their own sphere centered around their core. It can be made smaller, greater, and permissible, and impenetrable. The degree to which they are able to superimpose with other people's spheres can be tuned by the individual. Shame is created when someone is scraping at or downright invading that part of your sphere which you have made inaccessible to others. It's a sense of loss. If your integrity allows for it, you might just feel guilty for being exposed, but nevertheless, still ashamed. Now: telling people that their sphere should be on full-permeable mode at all times does not get rid of shame, because it creates a state in which all information may be lost to anyone's whims at any time. You literally lost your only means to contain something worth being ashamed for. It is the opposite of what you wanted to achieve: Instead of maybe being prejudged, you're now being judged with full conscience. And if that isn't going to create a torrential flux of shame, then what is?

Embarrassment may go hand in hand with guilt. It depends on your integrity to what degree. Like, you're doing group work in school (does that still exist?), let the project be taken care off by others, and then the teacher asks you to present your project. Your friends hand you their writings on the presentation. You're screwed. You will feel embarrassed because you have been coerced out of the information that you were placing your bets on being rewarded for your groupmates' work. Whether you will feel guilty, or not, this is like the last chance for you to be, if you haven't before. Examples like this should be found by the hundreds, and considering the vastness of human population, I think numbers are playing in favour of my case. So yeah. We agree?

I'm not sure I really see You're essentially saying that the difference between shame and guilt lies in the wickedness or lack thereof inside Are you familiar with the expression "shame on you!" ? I won't attempt to standardize something that has been used interchangeably for years. You can feel ashamed for something bad you have done and recognize to be bad. You can feel guilty without reference to observers. You can feel embarrassed without actually recognizing to have done anything wrong. It all works. But it doesn't work if you just assert that shame means this and guilt means that. Wouldn't you agree that it's not really just the idea that you might be disliked or judged for something, but a reference to yourself, too? If you walked outside in the nude - where is that shame coming from? The latter, or the former? Ask anyone for this: Would they, given the assurance that no consequence is waiting for them, walk naked in public - if nobody cared? I'm confident that no, most of them wouldn't. People don't like to be seen naked. Similarly, they don't like to be seen or known to do and enjoy certain activities. If it really was the judgement of other people that made you feel ashamed, you wouldn't feel ashamed. It's not that shame is the fear of being prejudged. It's more akin to being coerced out of information you think is precious or jeopardizing.

This is a malformed question. There is already a myriad of emotions I never got in the first place. And I can function properly and happily without them. If you're asking me to remove a secondary (emotions are reactions), you're asking me to remove "rewards" or "punishments". While emotions are never a primary, they can still be an incentive. Truth time: Rewards are incentives. But likewise, bad emotions may be designed to disincentivize you from something, so they're in a sense almost equally precious. I think I'd have to go with irrational fear. It doesn't require much thinking, but these are my reasons I'm not getting rid of worry or sadness instead. I don't want to become a robot. EDIT: This isn't to say that I think emotions are worth more than what they constitute reactions to. THINKING THAT REMOVING EMOTIONS SOLVES A PROBLEM RELATED TO THAT EMOTION IS BABYISH. YOU HAVE YOUR CAUSALITY MIXED UP, SIR.

Maybe they're training to be assholes. You never have someone behave strangely when you meet them alone. They only do so in the presence of their colleagues. Why this is, hell if I know. I laugh to myself if something is funny. (it's more like a smile really) If I laugh in a group, I don't make sure that we all look at someone randomly and make them feel as if we're laughing about them.

Also lol @ the french announcing the last 30 points in french "they never learn"

I think it has more to do with the ukraine, don't you think? I mean, sure, a countries' representative might disapprove of their eurovision representative, but conchita's victory wasn't ascertained long before the booings happened. This has nothing to do with conchita. This has to do with everyone's conspicuous dislike for actual russian expansionism and geopolitics.

Well, eschatologically speaking, the likelihood of the rapture to take us is far greater than us dying by something less stupid, soo...

Meh, meh, too much pop music. Europop pop contest. I think countries should put forward something traditional and see how well it is received with the others. Also, what happened to russia? So many boos. All the boos. For an event that is somehow about international friendship and cooperation, that was too devoutly politically motivated. blah blah Conchita deserved victory

I never understood what it meant to be to be open- or close-minded. Because if*(edit) openmindedness is tantamount to scepticism, then thank you, but no thank you. If close-mindedness is anything, then openmindedness is not the solution to it. Being a kilometer wide funnel for bullshit does not solve problems. Choosing to listen to anything while not trying to instantly recognize it as waffle does not solve problems. Similarly, closemindedness is like the position that you have a lease on a specific truth. Whether or not you are right in your position remains to be resolved. I think this entire open/close duality is basically putting tolerance and ignorance in a false dichotomy. So there.

So this is the "describe your personality" thread with additional letters wasted on meaningless pretend-guesswork? cool Well, they'd say I'm unique, not useful unique, but along the lines of being like a faulty tool. They might say I'm someone not to cross, probably, and that I live for and to myself, probably, and dabble in things and am like a one-way ticket into weirdheim. Probably.

Phoo.. I gotta say SomethingFloaty and Nine, but I don't want to exclude anyone, so Azusa, Andaasonsan, Daria, Destiny, Eloquence and of course, Scootalove a bunch of interesting people, I gotta say. And even highly compelling, one of them

As Jesus, and cause lots of confusion as I keep denying any affiliation with my father and all humans and also proclaim my desire for turkey club sandwiches whenever it's unsolicited As Bigfoot or any other cryptid, trolling the entire world with photobombing The toothfairy, and hang around with only one person ever, watching their life go down the skids as they appear to be a lunatic to others, talking to my invisible self As santa claus, but I'd only deliver to the rich As the anti-christ, gatecrashing parties and skedaddling after shredding a solo As Albert Einstein, applying for a job as janitor at a random physics institute