Do it, now. — Krishnamurti

In short, it seems groups can be seen as more intentional based on morals too, rather than just CEOs and generals, well morals or maybe just the words ‘harm’ and ‘help’ for other reasons. — invizzy

The analogy is to psychosis symptoms such as conspiracy theories. The specific reason I think this should be considered is an understanding that mental content is something emergent from physical brains but not the same thing. — Mark Nyquist

To get a mental image of this, imagine a virus on a computer network. Agent Based Models are a way to computer model this and simple models can show progression of a virus moving from node to node on networks with some nodes affected and other nodes unaffected. In biological brains the biology can be functioning normally but the corrupted networks of mental content are the cause of the abnormal condition. — Mark Nyquist

I see this as a very moderate expression of an argument for a genetic component to moral behavior. — T Clark

babies as young as three months old, long before they have language, are already judging other people's behavior and making value judgements. — T Clark

ought we not? — Isaac

Simple question - do those millions at risk of starvation because of the continued war get a say in whether it's worth it or not? — Isaac

There is no good solution because fossil fuels, and especially oil, are the backbone of our economy. It's the thing that made the industrial revolution possible and makes the economy tick, because it's a cheap, easy to use and an energy-dense source of energy. Add to that there are whole industries build on derivatives of oil and natural gas. — ChatteringMonkey

and it is this idealization of the objects in your environment that you are conscious of, not a faithful recreation of the color patches that make up your putative visual field. — Srap Tasmaner

It's a nice thought, but demonstrably false. — Srap Tasmaner

Except it's not a world of objects but of perceptions; objects are mere prejudice. Empiricism slides into idealism. — Srap Tasmaner

To begin with the question concerning external existence,
it may perhaps be said, that setting aside the metaphysical question of the identity of a thinking substance, our own body evidently belongs to us; and as several impressions appear exterior to the body, we suppose them also exterior to ourselves.
[Snip]
But to prevent this inference, we need only weigh the three following considerations. First, That, properly speaking, ’tis not our body we perceive, when we regard our limbs and members, regard to but certain impressions, which enter by the senses ; so that the ascribing a real and corporeal existence to these impressions, or to their objects, is an act of the mind as difficult to explain, as that which we examine at present. Secondly... — P190.

So that upon the whole our reason neither does, nor is it possible it ever
shou'd, upon, any supposition, give us an assurance of the continu’d and distinct existence of body. That opinion must be entirely owing to the IMAGINATION : which must now be the subject of our enquiry.

Then he explicitly concludes that the senses themselves cannot produce this separation. The senses don't distinguish what is part of yourself, and what is not. — Metaphysician Undercover

For as to the notion of external existence, when taken for something specifically different from our perceptions, we have already shewn its absurdity. — Hume

The subject, then, of our present enquiry is concerning the causes which induce us to believe in the existence of body : And my reasonings on this head I shall begin with a distinction, which at first sight may seem superfluous, but which will contribute very much to the perfect understanding of what follows. We ought to examine apart those two questions, which are commonly confounded together, vizi. Why we attribute a CONTINU’D existence to objects, even when they are not present to the senses ; and why we - suppose them to have an existence DISTINCT from the mind and perception.

The search is for a ground, a bedrock for knowledge. For Descartes, reason, for Hume, perception. Thus he (Hume) looks for causes of belief not reasons for belief. And as we know from elsewhere, he also argues that causes are unfounded ideas, that arise from but are not present in perception, along with continued existence and distinct existence.

We have something vaguely of the form P → Q → ~P. Yikes.

And it happens all over the place, his description of his chamber being another example, and his simple reliance on his own identity. — Srap Tasmaner

The sceptic must assent to the principle concerning the existence of body ... Nature has not left this to his choice. — "

That idea, [existence] when conjoin'd with the idea of any object, makes no addition to it.

There it is claimed, first, that since to conceive of any thing is to conceive of it as existing, existence is not a distinct idea at all, not a separable perception:

That idea, when conjoin'd with the idea of any object, makes no addition to it. — Srap Tasmaner

Being is evidently not a real predicate, that is, a conception of something which is added to the conception of some other thing. It is merely the positing of a thing, or of certain determinations in it. Logically, it is merely the copula of a judgement. The proposition, God is omnipotent, contains two conceptions, which have a certain object or content; the word is, is no additional predicate—it merely indicates the relation of the predicate to the subject. Now, if I take the subject (God) with all its predicates (om- nipotence being one), and say: God is, or, There is a God, I add no new predicate to the conception of God, I merely posit or affirm the existence of the subject with all its predicates—I posit the object in relation to my conception. The content of both is the same; and there is no addition made to the conception, which expresses merely the possibility of the object, by my cogitating the object—in the expression, it is—as absolutely given or existing. Thus the real contains no more than the possible.

You actually think we shouldn't try to get people who hear voices and think they are God to understand that their beliefs, and the voices they hear, aren't rooted in reality? We should just encourage people to listen to whatever instructions their voices give them, if they give instructions? — ToothyMaw

Well, the main idea is to listen carefully to each participant in the conversation, accepting their comments without exceptions or conditions. Within this unconditional respect for their voices, people start to listen to themselves. They learn more about their own story. This is why, in the dialogical approach, we do not look to find some right story, or some right commentary on the story of the person in crisis. Really, what is most important is the response in the here-and-now while speaking about the important issues of one’s life. The most difficult and most important experiences most often do not have any words, such that it would be possible to have an explicit narrative about it. They emerge in being moved, e.g. in an emotional reaction, by the things being told. This is the most important moment for a dialogical practitioner.
{snip}
In my mind, a much more effective way is to think about ‘psychotic’ behaviour as an embodied psychological response to extreme stress. ‘Psychotic’ experiences are one form of defence that the embodied mind uses to protect itself against a total disaster. They are not pathological, nor signs of an illness, but necessary survival strategies that everyone of us may need in an extreme situation. The extreme situation may be something that is occurring in the present, or it may be drawing on earlier experiences in a person’s life. In hallucinations, the person is most probably speaking about real incidents that have happened, but which they do not yet have any other words, other than ‘psychotic’ ones, to express it with. — Jaakko Seikkula

In the 1980s psychiatric services in Western Lapland had one of the worst incidences of ‘schizophrenia’. Now they have the best documented outcomes in the Western World. For example, around 75% of those experiencing psychosis have returned to work or study within 2 years and only around 20% are still taking antipsychotic medication at 2 year follow-up.

Open Dialogue is not an alternative to standard psychiatric services, it is the psychiatric service in Western Lapland. It is a comprehensive approach with well-integrated inpatient and outpatient services.

What a lot of nonsense you all talk. I made you and the world and you think I am mean because I didn't make it easy and comfortable for you. As if your everlasting comfort ought to be my priority. Perhaps don't worry so much about me, and learn to make each other's comfort a bit more your own priority, instead of the gleeful bickering. — God

I don't think I equated the kinds of experiences you just recounted with being called a white privilege denier or racist. Being called a racist does absolutely nothing to me in particular, although it is mildly annoying. — ToothyMaw

And the Negro's name
Is used, it is plain
For the politician's gain
As he rises to fame
And the poor white remains
On the caboose of the train
But it ain't him to blame
He's only a pawn in their game. — Bob Dylan

No, but try to adopt a nuanced view on race, attempt to discuss it with candor, and see how quickly you get declared a bigot or a white privilege denier. — ToothyMaw

inductive arguments are invalid. Obviously, my comments apply to valid arguments only.
— Average

You seem to be assuming that you will survive the ensuing chaos. — Average

What makes a government legitimate or illegitimate? Is it possible for a government to be legit or are all states sus? The entire discussion revolving around legitimacy seems to involve a lot of moral dogma — Average

Self evident principles and conclusions seem like they are probably just lazy philosophy. — Average

Illusion and Reality: The Meaning of Anxiety (1984) showed how an increasingly competitive, unequal society spawns chronic insecurity. The book challenged the notion that anxiety and depression amount to a mental illness denoting that something is wrong with the individual sufferer. For the most part distress and anxiety represent an entirely rational response to the sufferer’s situation. The role of the therapist is therefore not in ‘curing’ the individual, but rather to negotiate demystification and to provide insight into the effects of the problems in the sufferer’s world, based on the sufferer and the therapist’s shared subjective understanding.

It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society. — J. Krishnamurti

What do you say to the Amazonian, then, given that they have stolen their village “the commons”? They have no right to keep their village? — NOS4A2

We have not agreed to anything. — NOS4A2

Rights come from men. — NOS4A2

Rights come from men. — NOS4A2

Will you destroy my garden, should there be no “social contract”? Is this why you need to be governed? — NOS4A2