Sad wallow...

Who died?

Can we for real start a reading group on Trotsky?

Did China buy us ought? Quickly, time to start a reading group on Trotsky, he knew what's up...

Get angry folks!

DJ change the tune!

Comrade, the red is OK.

I'd compare it to a hostage situation, no?

Fall in love with both persons with Neuralink. Just don't go through a breakup, otherwise profound withdrawal effects.

Hmm, it seems to me that one can not talk about why the tragedy of the commons actually takes place without bringing into the discussion game-theory.

The prisoners dilemma can be a starting point.

And contrary to the prevailing sentiment ethics isn't a universal language game.

So it is gibberish...

Anyway, what I meant was that one can frame the condition of death either by the to be clause in the statement given or by adherence to the logic and scope of the framing condition of "in every possible world"?

You haven't been to other countries @schopenhauer1?

I don't even know if that's a mean comment per se.

You may expect too much of Stoicism. — Ciceronianus the White

I seem to have inverted that question and have asserted the converse. That Stoicism expects too much from modern-day man-kind. I'll get back if I have anything interesting to say.

Have you read James' The Will to Believe?

I have lost "faith" in Stoicism, as a guide to ones life, as the feels of despair simply get sublimated into profound futility of what little I have actual control over.

And here I want to ask you about Seneca, the dark horse of Stoicism. The man had it made from birth to death, and adopting Stoicism as a philosophy of life simply made the guy larger than life. What's your take on Seneca?

More like a Machiavellian-let them eat cake lover.

The extreme paranoia of The Thing is being enacted in real life Frank... If my sanity is in check I believe he wanted foreign intelligence agencies to give him dirt on US intelligence agencies. You can't make up this shit.

Or he's just losing his mind. He's not an evil genius. — frank

I think his head is reaching his intestines at this point.

*In the next episode of the Twilight Zone, we learn that his head can reach his stomach!*

*Folks his head is so deep down his ass, that we don't know where things start and where they end!*

The problem is that we don't know how much is the result of human activity, and we only have records (that aren't exact) that go back to when the recent ice age cycle started (that we are still in). — Harry Hindu

Yes, I've heard this somewhere before, that we are actually just entering a new cooldown period of the climate. Can you provide some links to this or is this just my imagination playing tricks on me?

Do you guys and gals know what really weighs heavily on my mind?

That a girl with Asperger's and an IQ to match her candor and concern over the environment has been chosen by the masses to represent the will and fortitude of the coming generation, which we (collectively or not) have essentially handed a no-win situation.

Let that sink in.

Cheers; and as per that thread, the answer is not political, nor economic, neither can provide a solution. The issue is ethical. — Banno

For some reason this comes to mind:

Whatever we do, the climate will change, sometimes dramatically, as it has in the past. — Tzeentch

I'll lend you my support in geoengineering given a classical economic cost-benefit analysis. But, you have to reach a consensus on who stands to benefit the most out of climate change and who stands to lose the most. As it stands, given my memory, China, Russia, and some other countries stand to, yes, actually benefit from climate change. Agriculture will be dramatically changed by increased CO2 in the atmosphere.

Yet, as per @Banno's tragedy of the commons thread, a consensus on the net effects of climate change on the wealth of nations will never be ascertained:

Hook me up! :wink: — csalisbury

The taxes in this market are too high. And my conscience won't allow it. But, hey I gave you a hint. :cool:

I just meant I knew someone who could get me drugs, and I was torn up, so I took them up on it. — csalisbury

Oh, shit. I was on a different wavelength totally. LOL.

And you paid too much. Look into 1P-LSD. Same shit, cheaper, and more tested so that you don't buy any poorly synthesized stuff.

I think hookups is like shooting yourself in the foot or an attempt to replicate something that's sincere and genuine. Hence I stay away from such things.

I really want to fall in love though. Ehh...

Love him or hate him he managed to accomplish whatever in his addled mind he set out to do.

But, I'm really liking the eternal mobilization theme that cropped up...

Continued struggle, strife, and eternal mobilization really come to mind. — Wallows

(Not necessarily bad things in isolation)

Wow, this takes me back a bit.

Continued struggle, strife, and eternal mobilization really come to mind.

Ok, so I rest my case. You contend that it's common knowledge between us that Trump is a crook. Yeah, no shit!

But, my point seems to have been swept under the rug or rather you have impeded an understanding of this new phenomenon in the American political process.

Here you say; but, this is the new normal, or something like politics at play, nothing new here.

But, the sheer amount of lies, crazy comments, and batshittery have emboldened everything that American democracy never really ever stood for. Furthermore, if we accept this as the new normal (which I have been blabbering about arising due to becoming desensitized towards this new phenomenon), is a strong factor in understanding how he is getting away with all said comments about shooting migrants in the legs, building moats on the border, and filling said "moats" with alligators and snakes.

Does that make any sense to you?

I don't know what this means. — StreetlightX

Affect can become a volition if it is adverse to the individual or organism. Like pain... outrage... or sensibility? Then change is demanded, like not putting your hand in the fire or electing business leaders who think they can manage their continued power through instilling a sense of apathy and desensitization towards the very institutions that were meant to allow for change(?)

Do you agree with this?

I don't think it's an important question - sensitivity. — StreetlightX

Really? I think you're conflating managed affect for affect that becomes a volition towards some effective change. Perhaps this is where we differ on the issue.

Well, do you at the very least agree that we have become desensitized towards the comments of my current prez?

So, with the above snippet being said, maybe you can see the merit of appealing to emotions, StreetlightX?

What do you mean 'only appropriate response'? — StreetlightX

To an extent. What I meant was that we should not ignore and passively let the standards of the US presidency be lowered into oblivion by becoming desensitized to the outrageous comments of a clearly disturbed man-child.

I should have been more explicit. An appeal to emotions is the only appropriate response to the dehumanization of people of color along with the apparent gross desensitization of our sensibilities.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons#Internalizing_externalities

How about internalizing the externalities? We already do this in California, with our highest gas prices in the nation...?

Listen! I was HEARTBROKEN. Some lady walks into my life says she has a sheet of acid for a couple hundred.... only a saint could resist. — csalisbury

I hear you. It wasn't necessarily directed at you. Just the whole thread, Jesus, and my neuroticisms showing in full force.

I think, my real point was that cognitive distortions only manifest after the fact. So, no harm meant.

hookup(s) — csalisbury

Talk about distorted thinking!

Yeah, and because of this, I don't foresee StreetlightX's appeal to (essentially an appeal to humanism) emotions, as ever bringing about foreseeable change, a much-needed change I should add.

Catharsis through protests has been negated by our very own human faculties to happen. I hope I'm wrong about this...

I'm sort of conflicted here. Desensitized electorates dont bode well for the future of a nation's democracy, despite it being the only defence mechanism against blatant crazy rhetoric.