• Is our civilization critically imbalanced? Could Yin-Yang help? (poll)
    There is gradual impoverishment of the masses and an an overpopulated elite establishment -- too much money, too much education, too much desire for power, etc. and nowhere near enough slots into which all the low level, mid level, and high level elite can fit. The Upshot? On the one hand, upheaval among the fucked over as they attempt to cope with ever diminishing returns for ever greater effort. On the other hand the elite fuckers resort to vicious tactics to grab power. It's a game of musical chairs in which the number of chairs is fixed and the number of chair seekers is enlarged every round. Competition quickly loses any polite formalities.

    Donald Trump Silvio Berlusconi, and Boris Johnson are three disgusting examples of the rash extremes chair contenders are willing to resort to.

    See End Times: Elites, Counter-Elites, and the Path of Political Disintegration By Peter Turchin. Just published today so haven't had time to steal his ideas.
  • UFOs
    It's funny how these sorts of discussions always go from UFOs to people who are UFoS.wonderer1

    No, given the topic, it's INEVITABLE!
  • UFOs



    Ufologist -- that's UFO-ologist, not Urologist.

    Greer was born in Charlotte, North Carolina, in 1955. He claims he saw an unidentified flying object at close range when he was eight years old. He claims he saw another UFO when he was 35. Greer was trained as a Transcendental Meditation teacher and served as director of a meditation organization. He received a B.S. degree in biology from Appalachian State University in 1982 and an M.D. degree from the James H. Quillen College of Medicine of East Tennessee State University in 1987. He received his Virginia medical license in 1989 and worked as an emergency room physician, and in 1998 retired as a physician in favor of his ufology activities.

    Fortunately he is retired from medicine. He should see a gastroenterologist ASAP since he is probably full of shit. That can be cured with a quart of potassium citrate and a large toilet.
  • UFOs
    if I'm being frankNoble Dust

    Stop pretending that you are frank, and don't call me Shirley, either.
  • The obscure psychic backroad between leftists and the European aristocracy.
    I guess, but the guys who attacked the capital on Jan-6 organized on-line. I think the internet helped Trump get elected. Maybe some of it seeps into real life?frank

    The antecedents of the "proud boys" existed and operated before the internet: Militias, Ted kaczynski (the 'unibomber), Timothy McVeigh (blew up Oklahoma City federal courthouse in 1995), the Baader Meinhoff gang, aka the Red Army Faxtion--1980s in Germany, Dwight Armstrong, who blew up a mathematics building at the University of Wisconsin in 1970, or the John Birch Society, Barry Goldwater, and Ronald Reagan (right wing crazies), et al.

    But it is certainly true that the Internet is now an essential tool for organizing and distributing information. Hey, in 1976 I was doing some organizing in the gay community and I had to put up posters on telephone poles and barroom bulletin boards!

    Frequency illusion is related to memory. Now that you know about something, it appears to pop up more often. In reality, your new favorite song may have always been around. But because it's on your mind, you might start to notice it everywhere and, in turn, think that it's somehow become more popular.

    The Internet feeds the 'frequency illusion' by magnifying bits of social detritus. Some dweeb "influencer" said something, it got posted on twitter then retweeted 10,000 times, and before long it's a movement. The better established mass media sucks up the inflated detritus and what was crap last week become official this week.

    Then there are lots of topics that may get mentioned on the Internet and social media that do not follow this pattern. The problems of the chronically poor, organized labor, the uninsured, people just released from prison, and so on don't seem to make it through the various social media and mass media 'filters' to become movements.

    The Internet helped elect Donald Trump because there was a real constituency--the older white well established right wing Republicans and the newer right wing of many working class whites. Bernie Sanders was able to attract outsized attention because there was a real constituency for a sort-of socialist elder among younger liberal/progressive voters, but not enough of them.

    Hey, where am I getting all this? From the Internet, social media, mass media, public television, etc.
  • The obscure psychic backroad between leftists and the European aristocracy.
    The point is that profit-making, as a European profession, did not pop into existence in the 1800s.frank

    A medieval history scholar said we know more about ancient societies (2000 - 3000 years ago) than we do about medieval society. That was several decades ago and historians have made progress, but whenever I read medieval history I am usually very surprised by what all was going on. It most definitely was not 'the dark ages'.

    I was playing with the idea that to the extent that there is any leftism in America, it's a pose, like a poster of Che Guevara makes your meaningless life more worthwhile.frank

    I plead guilty (but the statute of limitations has expired). Back in the late 60s, a poster of Che, maybe Mao or Lenin, seemed meaningful. Now I'd call it virtue signaling. For roughly a year (1969-70) I received leftist instruction from a roommate who had been involved in Trotskyist groups at the U of I in Champaign Urbana. I picked up some of the names, and some of the lingo.

    In the 1980s I had a real encounter with union organizing by participating in the Hormel Strike support group. The Hormel strikers lost, despite the heroic efforts of the support group to be supportive (tongue in cheek). But that was my first close encounter, at age 40 with an actual strike by actual blue-collar workers. They were all replaced at lower wages and worse working conditions. By that time I had become "a leftist" (sic).

    Without the power of labor unions, American leftists just strayed off into nowhere.frank

    This is perceptive. Without workers leftists are irrelevant. To be more precise, there is a reciprocal relationship between workers consciously struggling for their own interests and the larger picture provided by Marxism. Leftists who do not have a workers' consciousness can not be leaders or advisers in any especially meaningful way. Lots of leftists do not, in fact, have such consciousness -- not because we are fakes and hypocrites, but because our education and experience has taught us to think of ourselves as professionals and managers--even if we are still clock-punching workers doing white collar service labor. Workers who do not see the larger picture are at a major disadvantage.

    Just trying to figure the world out. Why all the angst toward "wokeness" and elitists?frank

    It's insubstantial social media chatter seeping into real life. Were one so inclined, one could do a history of social media trends, fads, and obsessions: Who started it on what platform; how it spread through various channels; where did it begin to be referenced as important; and so on. I think one would find that the hot issue of the moment (or year) owes little to real life, though it may have an effect on real life. Memes such as "the 2020 election was stolen" are UNTRUE, but have turned out to be quite powerful and/or destructive. "Stop the Steal", "Lock Her Up", "Sleepy Joe" and so on. "Racist", "homophobic", or "Transphobic" become clubs to bludgeon opponents (even though racism, and so on, are real).

    In a word, "It's epiphenomenal". (Maybe that's the right word...)

    I avoid paying much attention to all that crap.
  • The obscure psychic backroad between leftists and the European aristocracy.
    As the forerunners of capitalists appeared, it was out of the serf class.frank

    Sure, because in the early medieval period there weren't any capitalists. The local Lord had the income of land rent (from peasants, yeomen, etc.) so didn't need to invest. The peasants, on the other hand, had very few assets above and beyond a strong back. With luck, opportunity, and hard work, a peasant could break into a micro business of some sort and then begin accumulating some cash, sort of like Luther's father. Or, the progress from peasant to capitalist might take a few generations.

    We should distinguish here between "capitalists" and "industrialists". Early capitalists engaged in quite a few different businesses. Mines, factories, and the like were still small operations, This changed in the late 1700s into the early 1800s as steam power enabled bigger, heavier industry as such to exist. llllll
  • The obscure psychic backroad between leftists and the European aristocracy.
    Luther's father started out a peasant, true, but he fairly quickly succeeded in being a miner, then a mine owner, then a business man (doing what, don't know. Probably something associated with mining. A man on the make. Sonny boy Martin was supposed to become a lawyer to assist his family in achieving further success, but instead went into a monastery where nobody would ever hear of him again, but he turned out to be quite successful as a change agent.

    Moors? Moors? Bank of France in 1855? Darimon the Obscure? In what context are you writing, thinking?
  • UFOs
    Yeah, not many have had the chance to notice us.ssu

    Or, they have noticed us the same way we have noticed that some stars have planets in the 'goldilocks zone". We know almost nothing about these planets (so far). We have detected some planets because as they orbit around their stars, they ever so slightly reduce the amount of light reaching us, and this is repeated at regular intervals.

    Somewhere else in the galaxy (and beyond), astronomers are adding planets to their Oracle databases. We might be an entry if their telescopes were turned our way, one night. We'll just be one more speck on a photo receptor.
  • The obscure psychic backroad between leftists and the European aristocracy.
    They had one thing in common with the old aristocrats: they hated capitalists and capitalismfrank

    If they both hated capitalism, their reasons for doing so were quite different. Laborers were toiling in the 'dark, satanic mills' [William Blake's term]; long hours, dangerous working conditions; low pay; hard work. Aristocrats may have disdained the capitalists rapidly accumulating wealth, but they probably also envied it. Land-rent based aristocrats weren't poor, of course.

    The Left (socialists, Marxists, communists, anarchists (IWW), et al did indeed help workers organize, unionize, and resist capitalists' exploitation. I don't see a parallel between aristocrats and leftists or workers. What are you reaching for in making that comparison?

    You are right that labor and the left were steamrolled by global capitalism, Neo-liberalism, and governments. Capital and law enforcement (for example the FBI) despised the Left and after WWII finished off what remained of the once-muscular left. Post WWII economic expansion lifted incomes for many workers, as did VA, FHA, and related programs for home loans and college education. By the 1970s the expansion was over. Over the last 50 years, as you noted, the working class (>80% of American families) has gradually lost economic ground through stagnant wages, de-industrialization (or off-shoring), automation, and steady inflation.

    Academic leftists are perhaps somewhat analogous to a superannuated aristocracy. Most of them have just about zero connection with working class organizing or working class life. Struggling to explicate post-modern understanding within English Departments (et al) could just as well be taking place on Mars as at the local University. Some academics have risen from the ranks of the working class, but my guess is that most of them have been launched from the more favored middle class of professional families (or better).

    In summary: Yes, the psychic back road between the European (or any) Aristocracy and Leftists is indeed VERY OBSCURE.
  • The Modern ‘Luddite’
    AI comes to mind first. It's a new and potentially dire threat, depending on who deploys it for what purposes and whether or not it has big OFF switches. One problem with AI is that it seems to be distributed over a lot of servers -- a world of server farms. How does one bust up 100 server farms? (well, maybe a big electro magnetic pulse would do it, but one needs a nuclear weapon to create a really big EMP,. That may be tried at some point, but it won't be a Luddite project.

    One could just go after the ruling and wealth owning class who are likely to own and use AI. The problem with that is there are a lot of them. Rounding them up would be a pain.

    One could smash the machines -- assembly plants, refineries, computers, telecommunications, etc. That stuff is sitting out in plain sight. A future act or war which any number of nations could manage is cutting undersea cables which tie the system together.

    Workers of the world could unite and withhold their labor until the present system collapses. The tricky part (after getting a couple billion people to go out on strike at the same time) is building a society fit for human beings.
  • UFOs
    In a science fiction story, the aliens showed up on earth to announce that the Galactic Authority was evicting humans from earth. Why? We weren't making adequate use of the sun's energy. Since we were not, they had a list of others who would (Dyson spheres, that sort of thing). They graciously shipped a batch of humans off to a not very nice planet, where we could either sink or swim. This crappy planet's sun was way past its prime. Good enough for us.
  • UFOs
    An astrophysicist on the radio today said that one part of our alien-knowledge problem is that when pictures are taken of alleged alien vessels, it's almost always by 1 camera. Multiple camera angles are needed to judge distance, actual speed, and direction. A single camera shot just can't reveal too much.

    There was a conference on UFOs and SETI back in the 1970s. Ashley Montague was one of the speakers. He addressed a question about confronting "superior civilizations". He noted that Europeans among others, had encountered "superior civilizations on earth" a number of times, and the first thing we did was was wipe them out. He wasn't sanguine about our ability to benefit from an alien "superior civilization" (whether they were gravel-seeking or not).

    "Flying saucers" apparently were not employed by visiting aliens until the 1940s and 1950s, at least on American territory. What they used before then, don't know, and why they chose to fly around in rather flat disks without a whole lot of usable space, don't know. Maybe the aliens are pancake shaped, or maybe the flying saucers are the ACTUAL aliens, and not just their mode of transport.

    Another question is did the aliens travel from Z343X, 5 light years away, in a flying saucer, or were the saucers in a very large, boxy, commodious mother ship?
  • UFOs
    It would be quite impressive if we heard accounts of strange dish-like ships in the sky over France in 1817, for example. As far as I know, stories about extra-terrestrials got seriously under way during the later years of the 19th century. H G Wells wrote the book between 1895 and 1898 and Orson Wells and CBS scared the bejesus out of Americans with its War of the Worlds broadcast on October 30th of 1938 (even though they said, several times, "This is NOT a true story!"

    QUESTION FOR EVERYBODY:

    Do you wish that UFOs, Alien Abductions, and Alien Visits were, in fact, REAL, meaning our planet has been visited by aliens from another star system, and that aliens may be present on our planet right now?

    Or, do you fear that UFO stories may actually be true, and it frightens you greatly?

    Or, do you think this is all malarky?
  • UFOs
    FERMI'S PARADOX

    The following are some of the facts and hypotheses that together serve to highlight the apparent contradictions behind the Fermi paradox ("If there are so many possible livable planets out there, then where is everybody?"

    • There are billions of stars in the Milky Way similar to the Sun.
    • With high probability, some of these stars have Earth-like planets in a circumstellar habitable zone.[9]
    • Many of these stars, and hence their planets, are much older than the Sun. If Earth-like planets are typical, some may have developed intelligent life long ago.
    • Some of these civilizations may have developed interstellar travel, a step humans are investigating now.
    • Even at the slow pace of currently envisioned interstellar travel, the Milky Way galaxy could be completely traversed in a few million years.
    • Since many of the Sun-like stars are billions of years older than the Sun, the Earth should have already been visited by extraterrestrial civilizations, or at least their probes.
    • However, there is no convincing evidence that this has happened.
  • UFOs
    NEW YORKER cartoon showing aliens returning home with stolen NYC trash cans.

    new-yorker-may-20th-1950-alan-dunn.jpg?imgWI=8&imgHI=6.5&sku=CRQ13&mat1=PM918&mat2=&t=2&b=2&l=2&r=2&off=0.5&frameW=0.875
  • UFOs

    ATTENTION, PEOPLE OF EARTH

    We are on our way to your planet. We will be there shortly. But in this, our first contact with you, our “headline” is: We do not want your gravel.

    We are coming to Earth, first of all, just to see if we can actually do it. Second, we hope to learn about you and your culture(s). Third—if we end up having some free time—we wouldn’t mind taking a firsthand look at your almost ridiculously bountiful stores of gravel. But all we want to do is look.

    You’re probably wondering if we mean you harm. Good question! So you’re going to like the answer, which is: We mean you no harm. Truth be told, there is a faction of us who want to completely annihilate you. But they’re not in power right now. And a significant majority of us find their views abhorrent and almost even barbaric.

    But, thanks to the fact that our government operates on a system very similar to your Earth democracy, we have to tolerate the views of this “loyal opposition,” even while we hope that they never regain power, which they probably won’t (if the current poll tracking numbers hold up).

    By the way, if we do take any of your gravel, it’s going to be such a small percentage of your massive gravel supply that you probably won’t even notice it’s gone.

    You may be wondering how we know your language. We are aware that there’s a theory on your planet that we (or other alien species from the far reaches of the galaxy) have been able to learn your language from your television transmissions. This is not the case, because most of us don’t really watch TV. Most of our knowledge about your Earth TV comes from reading Zeitgeisty think pieces by our resident intellectuals, who watch it not for fun but for ideas for their print articles about how Earth TV holds a mirror up to Earth society, and so on. We mean, we’ll watch Earth TV sometimes—if it happens to be on already—but, generally, we prefer to read a good book or revive the lost art of conversation.

    Sadly, Earth TV is like a vast wasteland, as the Earthling Newton Minow once said. But, for those of you who can understand things only in TV terms, just think of us as being very similar to Mork from Ork, in that he was a friendly, non-gravel-wanting alien who visited Earth just to find out what was there, and not to harvest gravel.

    Speaking of a vast wasteland, you might want to start picking out and clearing off a place for our spacecraft to land. Our spacecraft, as you will see shortly, is huge. Do not be alarmed; this does not mean that each one of us is that much bigger than each one of you. It’s just that there were so many of us who wanted to come that we had to build a really huge spacecraft.

    So, again, no cause for alarm.

    (Full disclosure: each of us actually is much bigger than each of you, and there’s nothing we can do about it. So please don’t use any of your Earth-style discrimination against us. This is just how we are, and it’s not our fault.)

    Anyway, re our spacecraft: it’s kind of gigantic. The deceleration thrusters alone are sort of, like . . . well, imagine four of your Vesuvius volcanoes (but bigger), turned upside down.
    — THE NEW YORKER
  • Have you ever felt that the universe conspires against you?
    Have you ever feel that the universe conspires against you? — Niki Wonoto

    All the fucking time! Thanks for asking. WELCOME TO THE PHILOSOPHY FORUM

    Your discomfiture has to do with the ingravescent inimicalities of life as we know it.

    ingravescent = a condition gradually increasing in severity.
    inimical = The state or quality of being inimical or hostile; unfriendliness.

    Despite the appalling indifference the universe displays toward my many virtues, I have found that life is still, despite everything, reasonably satisfactory. In the end, Death comes by to collect us. Old guys like me won't have to wait all that long. Could be in the next 15 minutes--in which case, I should eat dessert before it is too late!
  • Gender is a social construct, transgender is a social construct, biology is not
    Bathrooms are for personal hygene and getting rid of waste bodily fluids.Philosophim

    Maybe somebody already spoke to this, but bathrooms are also a place to adjust one's clothing, possibly change clothing, and apply makeup (if one does such a thing). These are also private activities, tolerable in front of the same sex but less so in front of the opposite sex. Bathrooms are also, as you indicated, supposed to be a calm place, without unnecessary static.
  • Eugenics: where to draw the line?
    Genetic disease is an important topic, as is their control, so let's focus on genetically caused disease. Heliobacter pylori are bacteria, not a genetic disease. Cancer has a genetic component (certain types of breast cancer, for instance) but some cancers either do or may have environmental causes (viruses, chemicals, radiation, etc.) Cycle Cell Disease is a genetic disease. (It's not a sure-fire protection against malaria). Having fair skin isn't a disease either, and if Northern Europeans had stayed put (and not taken up residence as far south as Texas or even Minnesota) they wouldn't have sun-related problem.

    Some genetic diseases of various kinds:

    Down syndrome (Trisomy 21).
    FragileX syndrome.
    Klinefelter syndrome.
    Triple-X syndrome.
    Turner syndrome.
    Late-onset Alzheimer’s disease.
    Arthritis
    Autism spectrum disorder, in most cases.
    Coronary artery disease
    Diabetes
    Migraine headaches
    Spina bifida
    Isolated congenital heart defects
    Cystic fibrosis
    Deafness that’s present at birth (congenital)
    Duchenne muscular dystrophy
    Familial hypercholesterolemia, a type of high cholesterol disease
    Hemochromatosis (iron overload)
    Neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1)
    Sickle cell disease
    Tay-Sachs disease

    and more!

    So, a lot of suffering is caused by genetic disease, for sure, just as genetics prevent some diseases -- a lot of people do not get cancer despite risk factors. Some, not a large number, are resistant to HIV thanks to a genetic variation that protected some northern Europeans from the Black Plague 600 years ago,

    If we could, should we make genetic changes in the human genome to prevent these disease?

    One big problem is that while the number of people suffering from serious genetic diseases isn't huge, the number of people who carry the genes which, in combination may cause genetic disease is very large -- about 1.6 billion people (20% of the population).

    Genetic testing can identify some potential diseases that parents might pass on to children. how far do we go in preventing them from then having children anyway?
  • Should there be a cure available for autism?
    I'm also very open to the idea that XYZ condition offers some advantagesHanover

    Take psychopathy. On the extreme end, you get arsonists, rapists, and bloody murderers who don't feel much. They are clearly a problem. Too bad we don't have effective treatment, let alone cure. On the mild end of psychopathy are highly effective slightly psychopathic executives who can make necessary decisions which affect other people's lives (like having to lay off 10,000 people on Christmas Eve to keep Waffle House International afloat) without losing their managerial effectiveness. Such people are not going to be popular, but if you sit at a desk where bucks stop, there are hard decisions you have to make to keep the company going, win the war, get the movie made, or for-essential-national-security-reasons keep the remaining Waffle Houses open.
  • Should there be a cure available for autism?
    I am not autistic. I am gay, visually impaired, old, and chronically depressed (like for 30 years). I'm happy to claim being gay and being old as "uniquely me". I would happily do without large visual deficiencies and chronic depression.

    I am not a fan of transferring defects in development to "unique variations which should be celebrated". Severely hearing impaired people have developed a culture around sign language and their auditory isolation. That's great; more power to them! If someone doesn't want to avail themselves of an effective treatment for deafness (like a cochlear implant) that's OK by me, too--as long as deafness isn't set up as a norm which should not be treated, which doesn't have very significant implications.

    I like being gay. It's a behavior and a condition which appears quite regularly in nature. Is homosexuality therefore normal and natural? predictable yes, normal... maybe not. Normal or not, it's a perfectly acceptable defect or variation, however one looks at it.

    I'm also not a fan of ironing out all the wrinkles in human variability. Doing so might well eliminate musical prodigies, business geniuses, brilliant and productive writers, the rare very gifted inventor, etc, as well as eliminate problematic variations such as mental retardation, schizophrenia, epilepsy, and so on.

    Were there therapies to resolve any number of significant conditions, maybe they should not be applied without informed consent to the subject). Autism, homosexuality, deafness, blindness, etc. are not advantages, but they aren't diseases, either. Major caution should be exercised in treating these conditions. Could I have given informed consent at age 6? No. 18? Maybe. 30? Either yes, or never.
  • Incels. Why is this online group becoming so popular?
    Yes, all of the topics that are worth while and important are off the table.
  • Incels. Why is this online group becoming so popular?
    What can work?Baden

    Alas, we do not have effective solutions for all problems! For example:

    It isn't that I merely disagree with the right wing fundamentalist thinking of at least two of my siblings, I loathe and detest these views. Argue? Never speak to them? Criticize and berate them? No -- these approaches don't work. True believers are well-insulated from attack by their certainty in their beliefs. Plus, they're kin. Nothing I can do about that either. What we do, most of the time, is carefully avoid certain topics.

    The guy sitting across the table from you, spouting incel garbage, is likely impervious to criticism, careful argument, attack, shame, brute-force attack, etc. He is encapsulated in a sick (and sickening) world view. You might be able to do no more than deny him an audience. Leave. Is that an effective response? Not really, but it may be all that one can do.

    Apology accepted. In turn, I regret that I was relying on a very limited exposure to the content of incel chatter.
  • Understanding the Christian Trinity
    Fair enough,

    St. Augustine also prayed to God to make him chaste -- but not yet. A similar statement was made by Martin Luther -- "sin boldly, but let your trust in Christ be stronger" (edited for brevity)

    I read about the ethics of love in a book on situational ethics (by Fletcher?). Yes, if one decides to get out of the box, to drop the 10 commandments, the list of laws in the Pentateuch, or Hammurabi's code, and let love be one's guide, one pretty much has to think out of the box, at least to get one bearings.

    The people like Dorothy Day whose life I find admirable and inspiring, may have been guided by simple Christian love, but they also dug deep into Christian tradition for more specific guidance, and found it.
  • Understanding the Christian Trinity
    Morality is typically defined as a collection of rules.
    Moral realism says these rules have their source in something that transcends the human psyche.
    The golden rule requires a person to look within, to their own love for themselves to find the right path.
    Love replaces rules.

    The golden rule is moral nihilism.
    frank

    The first 4 sentences are coherent. The last, 5th sentence, doesn't follow.

    "Moral nihilism is the meta-ethical view that nothing is morally right or morally wrong." I kind of doubt that is what Jesus (and other holy men) had in mind.

    I can possibly see a bit of why you are reaching for moral nihilism. "Love" may seem like an altogether arbitrary and capricious rule to follow. It isn't.

    "Love" in the Golden Rule means "love your neighbor in the same way, the same degree, you love yourself". Presumably, you want what is good for you, what is beneficial, pleasing, healthy etc. That's the substance of what love provides for your relationships with others. Or "behave toward others the way you would like them to behave toward you". Presumably, you like people to treat you well. So, do likewise to others. That isn't so mysterious, is it?

    Those principles are not moral nihilism, because "love" is a positive value--not whatever we feel like doing upon checking within our beloved minds.

    As I understand it, moral nihilism is an extremely subjective system of morality -- whatever you feel inside. Guidance by love has to meet a standard of normal self-caring. Clearly, someone who is sick in mind, hates themselves, and loathes their own existence, will probably be an all-around unpleasant person and not demonstrate much love.

    Love, as a guiding principle, turns out to be a demanding master. Dorothy Day summarized the difficulty in the title of her autobiography -- A Harsh and Dreadful Love (that being the love that Christ bids us give 'the least of our brothers and sisters'. She began serving the very poor in the 'houses of hospitality' she established as part of the Catholic Worker movement, and found it to be immensely rewarding and at the same time very corrosive. The needs were so extreme, the resources always short, and many of the people they served were at their wit's end and pretty difficult to deal with. (She lived in the houses of hospitality -- it wasn't a 9 to 5 job.)
  • Understanding the Christian Trinity
    These are old tired points about the nature of truth and objective and subjective truth, based on perceived reference frames.universeness

    Isn't using "truth" the way you did also old and tired?
  • Understanding the Christian Trinity
    The truth is important to me, and my secular humanism needs no supernatural input to function. I find this functionality, to be very useful, based on my 99.999% conviction level that your god does not exist.universeness

    Is 'Truth' truth to everyone in the same way? If you have found a little, some, or all of 'the truth' have you found it not only for yourself, but for everybody else? I don't believe everyone has their own truth about the cosmos. But the truth in one person's circumstance may not be true in a different set of circumstances.

    You believe that you know the truth that the god @Hanover claims does not exist. (It's probably considered rude in polite society to inform people that their deities do not exist. It's similar (in terms of etiquette) to informing dinner guests that after the revolution we'll take all their property away from them. It might be true, but not very polite.

    Things are improving even more in places like the UK, where for the first time in recorded history, there are more brits who consider themselves non-religious, compared to the number who consider themselves religious.universeness

    Scholars of religion have noted that, while Europeans think they are the world's opinion leaders, on religious matters they are outliers.

    I agree, but I think the reason why, is that they are under attack from a growing global secular humanist movementuniverseness

    How big an army does the secular humanist movement have?

    Afaik, protestants do not believe in the trinity.universeness

    It's part of the Christian belief set. It's referenced in the creeds (apostles, nicene, etc.). Lutherans, for one group, Angligans/Episcopalians for another, invoke the trinity in liturgy and may make the sign of the cross (which of course came from Catholicism). A lot of Americans attend "low churches" where ritual and liturgy is de-emphasized.

    well if he was a socialistuniverseness

    Jesus was not a socialist (which would be wildly anachronistic). What he was doing for the first 29 years or so nobody knows, but during his last few years he was busy proclaiming the Kingdom of God, and then becoming the sacrificial Lamb of God. His admonishments to turn the other cheek. love your enemies, and render unto Caesar what is Caesars were all in the context of his role. There isn't any other way to understand him that makes sense. Besides, very few public speakers were urging an aggressive in-the-emperor's-face revolt. The Jews were herring up against sharks. Their best practice was to avoid confrontation. Jesus wasn't preaching "best practice" of course. He expected an eminent judgement of mankind by God, and so did the early church who created and assembled the materials that went into the New Testament,

    As it turned out, the Romans were, in fact, prepared to destroy the nation of Jews -- which they did between about 35 and 70 a.d. This caused the major Jewish diaspora out of the Israel and Judea, and the destruction of the Temple, producing 'the abomination of desolation' which persists 2000 years later.

    Because I believe in the existence of God.
    — Hanover

    Which one?
    universeness

    You are being obtuse, there.
  • Understanding the Christian Trinity
    I am interested in people's actual belief systems, as they directly affect what they choose to act upon.universeness

    For me, the strongest push toward socialism and liberation causes came from my reading of the NT and OT. I still counted myself a believer when I was being pushed, and the pushing continued after I concluded I didn't believe any more. I used to say that Protestant Christianity was my operating system. (It's a metaphor.) Whether I still believed or not, I couldn't delete it.
  • Understanding the Christian Trinity
    For an atheist, you seem to have a rather larger stock of theological material than many believers.

    I don't know whether it was intentional or not, but you spelled "evangelicals" as "evanhellicals. I like that. I'll use it.

    Evanhellicals and fundamentalists (incestuously related but not exactly the same) are hell on wheels.

    Fundamentalism is essentially a reaction to the biblical and scientific scholarship of the 19th century (continuing into the 20th, 21st) which dethroned inerrant literalism and pre-scientific understanding. It has, in the US particularly but not only here, become allied to Christian Nationalism and other fascistic elements. It isn't uniquely 'Christian' as the same thing is happening in Turkey (Islam) and India (Hindu) or even Burma (Bhuddist). There is a right-ward shift in several unrelated religions.

    Clearly religion is a going business, but

    "According to sociologists Ariela Keysar and Juhem Navarro-Rivera's review of numerous global studies on atheism, there are 450 to 500 million positive atheists and agnostics worldwide (7% of the world's population) with China alone accounting for 200 million of that demographic."

    Oddly enough, China also has one of the world's largest Christian populations.

    I am pretty sure the number of dis-believers, non-believers, and believers-in-name-only is a lot higher than 7%.

    Where does trinitarian doctrine stand in Protestantis?

    The Creeds (which many churches recite weekly) affirm the trinity. Liturgically minded Lutherans observe Trinity Sunday; the pastor may attempt an explanation, Or maybe find something else to talk about. Like sin and how they are against it. In many years of attending the Methodist Church there were few mentions of the trinity, except in the most formal rituals.

    A lot of evanhellical crutches ignore it all the time, The Unitarians don't have to mention it.

    "Being atheist means never having to say you're Lutheran." Name of a past long-running improv show in Minneapolis. The title was worth the show.
  • Vowels and consonants: Plurals and Names in English, Sanskrit and Basque
    I read somewhere that children who learn tonal languages are at least somewhat more likely to have perfect pitch. Apparently there is cross over from learning the right (likely pretty subtle) pitch of a given word and learning to identify a given musical pitch.

    True? False?
  • Incels. Why is this online group becoming so popular?
    Knowledge/wisdom falling on deaf ears is considered "ignorance."Benj96

    You might want to add an intensifier to that, what the Jesuits call "invincible ignorance".

    others downfall is their successBenj96

    "It's not enough that dogs succeed; cats must fail!"

    For me society/social cohesion is born of and propagated by a permanent state of autocorrection. Re-evaluation and implementation of corrective measures to bring things back to balance.Benj96

    Yours is a healthy "philosophical" approach. Carry on.
  • Incels. Why is this online group becoming so popular?
    I can and have condemned racists, sexists, nazis, fascists, terrorists, greedy capitalists, etc here and elsewhere. Honestly, I haven't given incels much thought till this thread came along, and everything everyone says about them (or that they say) qualifies them for my condemnation too.

    When the object of social opprobrium cares about others' opinions, that approach may work. I can cite zero (or very very few) results from my condemnations. The Philosophy Forum, or left wing radical papers are something of an echo chamber themselves, in that the appeal is to a very narrow (and small) group. Hard core racists, christian nationalists, abusive sexists, incels, nazis, fascists, terrorists--the whole cart load of mixed nuts--are not reading you, me, us. They have their own echo chambers.

    If condemnation has no significant effect, what does? I wish I knew. Don't we all?

    Racism may have been lessened by laws limiting its expression. The same can be said for sexism, in a very qualified way. It seems to take decades of very gradual changing social norms to see major change. Material shifts tend to drive these gradual social changes.

    Got to go.
  • Incels. Why is this online group becoming so popular?
    The victims of thieves than the perpetrators of theft. The victims of violence and rape are deserving of more compassion then the perpetrators of violence and rape and the victims of online misogynistic abuse are deserving of more compassion than the perpetrators.Baden

    Of course the victims of crimes against persons deserve compassion--compassion in the form of concrete succor. No one has difficulty in expressing compassion for victims, nor should they. (Well, some people blame the victims and pile on blame.)

    It is not the case that perpetrators of crimes deserve "more compassion" than victims and I didn't claim as much. Apparently you feel that they deserve no compassion at all. Quantifying compassion, mercy, and other such terms is difficult.

    What does compassion mean when there are actually, physical offenders -- like murderers, rapists, wife beaters, child sexual exploiters who have actually done what incels talk about?

    Compassion means

    a) we avoid de-humanizing them.
    b) we accord them protection under the law (fair criminal proceedings, etc.)
    c) we don't grab the accused and lynch them--even if they do belong to the Klan or are verified incels.
    d) we don't legally execute them (in most places, at least)
    e) we don't lock them up for life without extenuating circumstances
    f) we offer offenders (who carried out incel-type acts) therapy and rehabilitation (in many places)

    There is no justice in locking an offender up for 20 years in a intensely anti-social institution (prison). until they are even crazier and less able to function in a normal citizen's role--and them discharge them, locked and loaded to be even more dangerous problem.

    If we are not going to lock them up forever, then we had best either shoot them right away, or attempt to reform them through compassionate programs.

    You don't get moral brownie points for a pseudo-Jesus act that pretends they are all the same.Baden

    Moral guidance from you? Hardly,
  • Incels. Why is this online group becoming so popular?
    if all you are saying is we should always be compassionate for everyone regardless of what they've done or what they stand for then you really aren't saying anything but just effacing all moral distinction.Baden

    You are shallower than I thought you were.
  • Incels. Why is this online group becoming so popular?
    and then specify you're talking about others more deserving of sympathy.Baden

    Are petty thieves more deserving of compassion than those who engage in grand theft? No. Is compassion and mercy something that can be casually granted by the individual without much effort, such that just any Tom, Dick, Mary, or Jane can emit compassion without inconvenience? No.

    Further, compassion and mercy are not like "Get Out Of Jail" cards in Monopoly.
  • Incels. Why is this online group becoming so popular?
    The standard definition of "compassion" is not as compelling as a more extended treatment: "sympathetic pity and concern for the sufferings or misfortunes of others.
    "the victims should be treated with compassion"

    Mercy is a component of compassion or forbearance (see forbearance sense 1) shown especially to an offender or to one subject to one's power. also : lenient or compassionate treatment. begged for mercy. : imprisonment rather than death imposed as penalty for first-degree murder. : a blessing that is an act of divine favor or compassion.

    You said "we", not individuals. In normal parlance that is a generalised "we" that includes women and everyone else.Baden

    You are being pedantic. "We" is the plural form of one individual. If "we" must include all 8 billion people on earth, men and women alike, then so be it.

    suggests you don't know what you're saying. I don't want to hound you but I think it's fair to ask what you're talking about.Baden

    One would think a linguist (you have been accused of being a linguist, I don't have any evidence either way) would have more facility reading.

    A psychiatrist was asked if psychopaths (whom can be credited with some horrific crimes) should receive care. His response was that psychopaths suffer from very significant abnormalities and deserve compassionate care. Again, the offer of compassion and mercy does not include approval, any more than forgiving someone who attempted to murder oneself implies approval.

    Announcing that what incels are saying is offensive to women (never mind most men) is boilerplate--a rote text, like the rote phrase, "incredibly racist" and a few dozen other expressions,
  • Incels. Why is this online group becoming so popular?
    a) Compassion does not signify approval. b) An internet group is an abstraction which can not be the object of compassion--which is not to say it doesn't exist in some form--just like TPF can't be the object of compassion. c) Compassion is the province of individuals. "Women" as a group can not be compassionate; an individual woman can. Moderators, as a group, can not be compassionate. You, as one individual, whoever you are, can be.

    I don't recollect advising women to be compassionate, or anything else.
  • Incels. Why is this online group becoming so popular?
    Loneliness is an under-rated condition that affects a lot of people. I suspect that many instances of diagnosed depression are actually loneliness, alienation, anger, grief, being left out or left behind, being poor, debt-ridden (uncomfortably saddled by one's debts), unhappily employed, etc., particularly in comparison to one's peers.

    One's peers may not be living lives of unparalleled satisfaction and happiness, but maybe they are successful enough to maintain a convincing veneer of comfort and joy.

    Life sucks for everyone to some degree and in some ways; for some people it sucks a lot more. We can and should be compassionate towards them. That's one thing.

    Social media operate through extremely active algorithms which seek clicks and amplify whatever click-pattern gets more clicks. Thus, one ends up getting a lot more offers to look at progressive sites, conservative sites, anarchist sites, dogs-and-cats-being-funny sites, renaissance music sites OR, if one clicks in this manner, crypto-fascist sites, incel sites, nazi sites, ISIS sites, Christian nationalist sites, white supremacy sites, and so on. That's another thing.

    Why do social media operate in this way? Media users may provide YouTube, BlogSpot, Tumblr, FaceBook, et al with a lot of free content, but server farms, electricity providers, employees and shareholders have to be paid for. How do social media do that? Mostly through advertising. How much a site can get for an advertisement depends on eyeball volume.

    Social media are not social service providers or healthy lifestyle engineers. They go where the wind blows.

    The presence of a given type of content tends to validate the views of those landing on a preferred site, be they MAGA Republicans, incels, vegans, philosophical Georgia lawyers, or aged gay socialists. We all fit into someone's market niche, like it or not, click, click, click.