Crazy shitpost maaan.

Okay, then we have progress on the issue. Still, that wall isn't being paid by Mexico, as promised it would be...(?)

I’m just saying that Mexico is paying for American border security. You can thank Trump for that. — NOS4A2

Maybe you're living a parallel universe, but can you back this claim up in any manner or form?

On a not entirely different note, I've been watching the NASA meltdown in regards to Elon Musk taking a puff of marijuana on a dumb Joe Rogan podcast, and as a result of this, he had to apologize to NASA and SpaceX employees about the excursion.

It's really paradoxical that for open-minded people who want to explore space, to be so militant against a harmless mind-expanding compound. I suppose the people at NASA and engineers still think it's the 50's or something??

EDIT: And, he didn't even inhale!

I'd rather not. I already presented my rationale, earlier.

Mentioning that he starved himself to death because of a food paranoia tends to grab the attention. — Marchesk

:mask:

My bad then...

I've been diagnosed with schizophrenia and can hardly concentrate at all. — Wheatley

Yeah, I used to have that diagnosis. Although, I don't have the negative symptoms of schizophrenia, which eventually made my diagnosis be a psychotic disorder. I'm not prone to magical thinking or thought insertion, which are hallmarks of schizophrenia. The ability to concentrate on something for prolonged periods of time is thought to be governed by a very precarious balance between dopamine and glutamate. The two work in concert to facilitate the prefrontal cortex to focus of salient features of some tasks.

Mind you, it's been demonstrated that concomitant use of amphetamines with an antipsychotic, relieve the negative features of schizophrenia without exacerbating the positive ones in regards to the ability to concentrate. Just, don't make that a hasty decision, as Adderall, Dexedrine, and Vyvanse are very psychologically addicting compounds. More so for people with ADD or mixed diagnosis.

Edit: Norepinephrine, is important too; but, drugs like Strattera that boost NE levels in a controlled manner, aren't effective for these sort of issues in people with schizophrenia.

If that doesn't count as being crazy... then nothing will. — creativesoul

Incredible. Instead of talking about his sentiments about Platonism, which can be gleaned through his incompleteness theorems or Turing's Halting problem, and his dismissal of mathematical formalism and with that a deathblow to mechanism, we're focusing on whether he was "crazy" or not.

Whatever dudes.

You should try and live a day thinking in 3'rd person.

Shit is awesome for these disquietudes.

I'm taking this to another level, even further than Descartes who doubted the reliability of his perception. I'm asking you to think about your mind, i.e., think about thinking itself. Ask yourself, "What if my own cognition is distorted?" Maybe I'm not thinking straight, or perhaps I even have skewed version of reality? It's easy to point to a person who has "lost their minds", and not so easy to ask yourself, "have I lost my mind?". — Purple Pond

In psychology, this is called reality testing. Something the insane don't do much. *Happy thoughts*

Since you referenced Descartes and implied his evil demon in this thread, I'd say as long as you can doubt, you're fine.

You better not come to The Lounge then.

It's my thread so GTFO.

So, the straw man of why the poor are poor is complete?

Don't take that too seriously, although I hope it comes off as sincere.

Yes, sorry.

I'd like to revise my prior questionnaire to a more simple and personal feel-good existential question to Prof. Pigliucci to be the following:

• Why Stoicism?
  
• What about Stoicism appealed to you instead of other schools of philosophical thinking?

I leave it to the moderators to decide what is more interesting and wholesome a question to ask. Though, I feel like this is the right question to ask instead of the tedious ones beforehand.

You know, that is actually a pretty interesting question.

Is Stoicism more taxing on a person than simply assuming that everything goes?

Have at it.

Yeah, well this is why we have underwriters and assessors in banks who weigh the probability of success for a startup along with the interest on the loan being a reflection of that...

By no means I am an authority on the matter; but, let's suppose that we could envision an uncountable alphabet, then doesn't that suppose a mathematical realm in some objective sense, hence Platonism? — Wallows

And, in a sense this "bypasses" Godel's incompleteness theorems, which Wittgenstein sought to point out as far as my limited knowledge spans.

By no means I am an authority on the matter; but, let's suppose that we could envision an uncountable alphabet, then doesn't that suppose a mathematical realm in some objective sense, hence Platonism?

I mean, this in the most abstract sense...

Well, you presupposed that they won't win anyway. So, if those poor schmucks can't win then credit is bad for them? Am I getting you right here?

Hey, I've watched A Beautiful Mind. Being crazy doesn't mean you can't also be an accomplished genius. And I was only referring to the part about starving yourself to death out of food paranoia. That sounds like an untreated mental illness. — Marchesk

It could be, don't really know. I tend to suspend judgment calls on such matters.

I read in an interview that Massimo talked of Epictetus as 'playing the role of his personal 'daimon'. This reminded me of Socrates' 'daemonion' who kept him on the right track. This seems to be spiritual if not divine in nature. — Amity

Mhm, I didn't want to psychologize the issue, since no authority can be bestowed on such sentiments; but, I did hint at that question in a more broader sense wrt. to what Prof. Pigliucci might think is happening for other people when they become, and as to why they might as well become interested in Stoic philosophy. It's a tough question to answer definitively, and I suppose it can be edited out when the final draft is presented to him.

The forthcoming discussions should be fabulous :cool: — Amity

Yes... Though, I suppose I shall go and wallow a little now.

Look, I see you edited your post two or three times, about him being a paranoid schizophrenic at it being an established "fact". So, I rest my case. This discussion seems to have evolved into giftedness and "craziness", so it's up to you to either take it in that direction or not.

Hostile to Kurt Godel? Are you kidding me? I idolize the man in many regards. I see we're on completely different wavelengths here, so I'll stop the projecting, which (according to you and your "consensus" about him being a paranoid schizophrenic is entirely made up in my mind).

Uhhhhh .... sure. — Marchesk

Great. Have at it, a guy who was best friends with Einstein taught at Princeton and completely demolished Hilbert's program is... crazy. Is this shitposting taken to a new level on TPF?

Are you bashing on Godel? I'm not. — tim wood

Well, you made the annoying quip about him being crazy. He was paranoid about food and starved himself to death; but, not "crazy".

As to his incompleteness theories, I do not think you understand them - maybe at all. — tim wood

No, I have a pretty good understanding of Gödel's incompleteness theorems. But, don't take it from me, by all means... I actually understood his work in regard to reading about it from Tarski's undefinability theorem, who arrived at the same conclusions somewhat latter (another case of Newton vs Leibniz wrt. to truth, in my mind).

https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1509/1509.02674.pdf
https://academic.oup.com/philmat/article-abstract/2/3/177/1455520?redirectedFrom=PDF
https://www.cairn.info/revue-internationale-de-philosophie-2005-4-page-513.htm#

Fortunes require a foundation of money, from somewhere. — Bitter Crank

Not necessarily. Patents are a great example of something available in access even to "Joe Blow". There are even companies that assist you in developing your idea. This is where I diverge from the material aspect of viewing value or profit. Since, Bloomberg saught through investing in making high-quality information available to the masses (originally, to the rich only), then it seems to me that the material aspect of viewing an ROI is defunct or outdated?

The structural advantages you reference greatly assist the rich in obtaining their status in the first place. — Bitter Crank

If that were true, then supposedly this leaves us with two conclusions...

1) Getting there by any amount of effort is futile because the game is rigged in "their" favor.

2) You have to be really special to attain that status.

Neither of these conclusions is supported by evidence, so one must disregard the premise?

On the question of the status of Platonic ideals, where are we? — tim wood

Not in college.

Where should we be? — tim wood

In college.

Talk about draining the swamp!

People like Kurt Godel, however, apparently thought that a Platonic world exists. As it turns out, Godel was also crazy, but that alone does not make his thinking dismissable. — tim wood

Bashing on Godel, his incompleteness theorems points towards the noetic faculties of the mind that are capable of perceiving beyond that of which would be limited by his incompleteness theorems. That's actually a powerful argument for Platonic ideals, and/of which nobody really phrases the question about Platonic idealism in this way; but, I find the argument ad hoc persuasive.

Well done, Wallows. — Ciceronianus the White

Let's save that for after the event has occurred, heh, to be Stoical about such matters. :halo:

The structural advantages you reference greatly assist the rich in obtaining their status in the first place. — Bitter Crank

Do you mean that it assists them in manner of speaking in maintaining their wealth or getting there in the first place?

Good day folks — TheMadFool

Aye...

Big companies have long relied on strategies to reduce their tax bills. — Lif3r

Yeah, that is true, and hence why I am all for closing tax loopholes, and the means to entice tax evasion, like the tax havens, where it's estimated a hefty sum of some 15+ trillion bask away in the Bahamas.

so you believe that America will never have a revolution so long as it exists? — Lif3r

I really don't think there has been a viable alternative to even entertain the notion of "transitioning" or even a "revolution". Just look, at the M2 money stream from FRED. I mean, where is that money going to go?

Even if it continues to over tax the majority of it's citizens, write of the taxation for the rich, and allow corporations to pay wages that barely scrape by for back breaking labor? — Lif3r

The facts point towards a pretty progressive tax code in the US. If you make less than the egregiously defined poverty line, you pay nothing in taxes.

Or do you expect the poor to just be satisfied that they can afford the CEO another yacht this year because the CEO was lucky; born to the right people under the right circumstances. — Lif3r

CEO's have always seemed to me as an example done out of poor reasoning. Let's take the population of the US and compare it to the number of CEOs in the US. You end up with a really low number of the number of people actually being CEOs. Furthermore, if you're adamant about the issue, then you should strive to become your own boss.

Also, let's please keep in mind that most people don't only work for money. The frictional unemployment rate in the US is pretty steep due to this.

But I feel like you also agree that there is a growing gap.
And I feel like you agree that this usually results in a transition. — Lif3r

Let me reassure, you, the US will never experience a "transition" in governance. Trump may seem as an outlier; but, apart from his estranged foreign policy towards the rest of the world, he's a pretty common politician for the right.

There's this sort of implicit conspiracy present within the left, that is overstated. I suppose it's a relic of treating the rich as villains by the far-left.

Just take a look at the HDI for the US: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index

It's an objective measure of your prospectus of living in the US and making or breaking it. If you want to play safe, just open a 401k or mutual fund/ETF from Vanguard or elsewhere, into an index fund. No need for active management on these sort of things. Just don't steal from yourself by pulling out money from the index fund, and all will be fine when you reach retirement.

Also, being rich doesn't mean that you can just live on some island and never care anymore about working. It's a very time-consuming thing to maintain your wealth, and expand it.

There are two things in the US that stand out in my mind as barriers to the poor. It's universal healthcare and college tuition. — Wallows

You remove those two barriers and most of the talking points of the left disappear.