But so do you. Everything about you devolves into linguistics, including your innermost thoughts and ideology. That’s exactly what makes it possible to speak about you; and what makes that worth doing. — kudos

Well if that's how you see it, fine. In my universe, a much smaller one in comparison to yours, Being is not discussed. I probably lack the vocab to do so.

That said, having a body is sufficient but allegedly unnecessary to Be.

5. Beanz Meanz Heinz — Tom Storm

Private language? :chin:

Well, Being ultimately devolves into linguistics. The subjective aspects of Being can't be communicated and hence your project "to bring it into deeper subjectivity" ends before it starts.

I predict that the AI machines will turn out to be another bunch of ungrateful bastards. — BC

:lol: I know!

You wouldn't know what I'm talking about, mon ami. There's a lot of subjectivity in it, enough to void any objective analysis of self/being (same thing).

Apparently you are trying to practice BothAnd philosophy by giving a thumbs-up to contradictory interpretations of the significance of essential Information : malleable Data vs causal Information. Did you watch the video? Are you now confused? Did you notice that it's about Shannon's abstract meaningless Data, not about Gnomon's mental meaningful Information? — Gnomon

:lol:

You've discovered yourself.

Frankly speaking, I recommend you develop your theory of information in more depth. At present it seems its definition is just too loose to be endorsed or critiqued. :smile:

Leibniz and Newton both hit upon the idea known to us as calculus without sharing notes. This is convergence at its best. In nonmathematical domains, divergence is the norm.

In order of preference

1. Good means, good ends
2. Bad means, good ends
3. Good means, bad ends
4. Bad means, bad ends

:smile:

Aah! I see.

The numbers do add up but don't they? Nevertheless, you make a good point - the benefits (probably) outweigh the harms if we bring racial profiling to an end. Also, it's, as I mentioned, probably an artefact of the real problem to wit, poverty as caused/perpetuated by historical racism.

Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts. — A. Einstein

We're social animals, so they say, and given that, aloneness is distressful. It looks like Maslow was right on the money, even though his hierarchy of needs has been somewhat discredited but only for those who want to split hairs. You might wanna reexamine Maslow's thesis.

Some people are just there to fill up the available slots - they don't actually care what happens, who wins/loses. Others take joy in only participation. Still others buy beer and popcorn to watch and only watch the spectacle. The rest (how many left now?) are competing.

A good yardstick for whether aliens will see the world in the same way as we do is mathematics (the independent discovery of pythagoras' theorem by multiple isolated cultures). Carlo Rovelli, however, begs to differ.

Maslow's hierarchy is rather apposite to the examination of solipsismt/aloneness vis-à-vis other minds.

:up:

It appears to me that one ought to be equally cautious because the religious denomination has yet to prove itself to be any sort of mitigating factor in the criminality. It’s too arbitrary of a distinction. — NOS4A2

Indeed.

It is a point which opaques the main issue: Police abusive behaviour. The police officers who beaten up that young boy are black too. So, as I explained before, following the views of other members and protesters, the problem is the colour blue, police departments. Five armed and equipped men against one person is filthy as hell... It is not even justified. More than a crime is a shame on an institution that is there to supposedly protect you. — javi2541997

:up:

If you read my other posts, you would've seen that I attributed the problem at hand to slavery (impoverishment of blacks and residual, pernicious, racism) which is exactly what you're trying to convey

:up:

Indeed, indeed!

But hey, according to Agent Smith, the problem is on African American's shoulders not the brutality and violence of the cops :roll:
1h — javi2541997

That is the truth but not the whole truth - I made it a point to mention the legacy of slavery (impoverishment over generations, combined with residual racism).

Superb summary of what transpired betwixt you and @Gnomon. The salient points (of contention) highlighted for the audience's benefit, kudos.

Gnomon's thesis may need work, but it isn't philosophical crankery in me humble opinion, but que sais-je?

Smith doesn't know that he himself has 10 coins in his pocket and so when he "infers", from the interviewer's statement that Brown'll be hired, that the man with 10 coins in his pocket'll be a happy man, he's wrong.

1. Smith could have 10 coins in his pocket and hey may not be hired.
Ergo,
2. The man with 10 coins in his pocket doesn't necessarily get the job.

Smith is essentially ignoring a possibility that he shouldn't.

Ok... and how that's related to the abusive behaviour of police officers? I think you are mixing up the problems. — javi2541997

Without some numbers to go with that claim, I'm not buyin' it.

Good points. :up:

Si, si señor, the feelings, they swell up and you know what happens next. Somebody has to sit down, pore through the data, analyze it, and present to us their findings. Racism is a serious charge (it has the potential to destabilize the entire nation) and so, we must be certain if it exists in the police force (our guardians). We can't simply look at individual incidents where innocent black lives were lost. We have to also prove that they're statistically disproportionate/inexplicable to/by other relevant data (race-based crime rates for example). I'm especially concerned by blame-deflection (from historical racism/slavery to an especially vulnerable group given the nature of their job, the men in blue). Perhaps we can treat police violence as some kinda surrogate marker for historical racism - the black and crime correlation would've never materialized if blacks had been treated fairly from the start.

One crucial point that hasta be made pronto (@180 Proof) is that race maybe the wrong parameter to focus on i.e. (this is extremely likely) it may actually be poverty that drives people to crime and not some kinda racial defect. Since there are more poor blacks than poor any-other-race [blame falls squarely on the shoulders of historical racism (slavery)], blacks will dominate the crime statistics, creating the illusion (maya's a bitch) that blacks are (more likely to be) criminals. Some other socioeconomic factor, not necessarily poverty, may be at play.

With a significant number of heavy tanks from the West now heading for Ukraine, including the Leopard tanks from Germany. Things just escalated! Much bigger booms coming or Russian bust? — universeness

What's the time by the Doomsday clock?

I don't experience myself and if by "this person" you mean me, there's no this person in my (rather sad) life.

The person who experiences anything, including himself as himself, is Parmenidean Being (take note of the uppercase B). Nothing more can be said about this person and I'm assuming person is a coherent idea - it looks very flimsy/fragile.

Yes. I know what you are doing because it has been going on for generations. It is a racist justification, akin to the racist justification for mortgage zoning.

Prejudice produces injustice.This has been known for long enough that the depiction of justice personified has a blindfold. But Agent Smith and the police do not care about justice so much as they care about their own interest. — unenlightened

You must not misconstrue my words though this is likely given this issue is close to many people's hearts.

Imagine a police force that thinks falsely that this is the case. Their prejudicial behaviour will mean that Muslims are lightly policed and Christians are heavily policed. That obviously results in skewed statistics that reinforce and justify the prejudice. Imagine this going on for generation after generation until becomes a universally accepted truth amongst Christians and Muslims and even atheist philosophers. Imagine folks conforming to the stereotypes they are brought up with. Imagine folks rationalising racism in all seriousness on a philosophical website and folks completely agreeing with them. — unenlightened

Well, I'm not saying the situation as it stands isn't due to past injustices (slavery has cast a long shadow). What I am saying though is African Americans need to pull up their socks, of course with state assistance as is due to them, proportionate to the wrongs done to them.

I'm calling to my assistance statistical data to make the case that racial profiling is, though lamentable, justified. Let the numbers do the talking - any statistician will come to the same conclusion as me. Our pressing concern, our real task, is to take appropriate action to break the correlation between being black and being a criminal.

It seems that the crisis we're facing today is a direct consequence of historical racism (slavery) but itself is not racism.

That's not remotely a new insight ... and, IMO, irrelevant to the manifest functions of both institutions. :roll: — 180 Proof

:ok:

Your presumption is nonsense. — 180 Proof

I understand, but to me we've got the wrong end of the stick mon ami.

False trichotomy. — 180 Proof

:ok:

Nonsense, comrade. :brow: — 180 Proof

Math is nonsense? :chin:

:up:

I prefer your yin in yang and yang in yin idea. @Gnomon is on the right track then - there's religion in science and there's science in religion.

To be honest Smith, I think not... some tend to reasoning more than others. — javi2541997

But my argument from probability does explain the apparent racism in the police force. We can take this further (using mathemagic) and check if police-related death rates among blacks fall within the expected range given the crime rates in the black community.

My intention is not to trivialize the suffering of any community, but to zero in on, identify, the real problem e.g. high crime rates vis-à-vis African Americans. Misdiagnosis of an illness is only going to delay and make less effective the treatment.

@Andrew4Handel

If you're a theist, pray.
If you're an atheist, don't pray.
If you're an agnostic, neither pray nor don't pray. What exactly is that? Tertium non datur.

The big problem here is that the cops tend to not act rational at all. This is why they abuse and charge people discriminatory. — javi2541997

I'm trying to understand/investigate the logic behind what people call racial profiling which to my reckoning is probabilistic/statistical. We use the same reasoning as cops do every day in our lives e.g. most teenagers like to dance and so if I meet a teenager, it's likely that s/he likes to get jiggy with it.

I have seen the video where the cops beat this defenceless young man. Police officers reported that they pulled Tyre Nichols out of the car because of a "reckless driving" but is obvious that is a filthy lie. Five policemen (full armed and equipped) against a normal citizen is one of the most filthiest acts I ever seen for a long time.

It is not important if the police officers are black. As many protesters have so wisely said: They put on a blue uniform and forgot they were Black! It is not about of white or black when their blood is blue.

Police officers have always been the dogs of prey for the state and government. — javi2541997

:up:

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

@180 Proof

Imagine a village of 100 people, 50 are Christians and 50 are Muslims. Of the 50 Muslims, 20 are criminals and of the 50 Christians, 30 are criminals.

You're a cop.

Scenario 1
You see a Muslim. What goes through your mind?
The probability that the Muslim is a criminal = $\frac{20}{50} = 40\%$

Scenario 2
You see a Christian. What now?
The probability that the Christian is a criminal = $\frac{30}{50} = 60\%$

So you, as a cop, are fully justified to exercise extra caution when you see a Christian when compared to a Muslim.

It seems that you (the cop) are being completely rational and the math above is proof of that. However, this increases the odds that you'll be (falsely) charged with discrimination and brutality against Christians (the extra caution may manifest as excessive force).

Yeah, whatever. I think you are missing my point. You are adding two thoughts together and creating reality. I don't think the world works like that. There are not three dwellings, but only one.You cannot live in an address or live in architect's plans. So your list does not work and your math doesn't work.

If I have a drawing of an apple, a photo of an apple and an apple, how many apples do I have? — unenlightened

@john27

You mean to say there's only one self. Perhaps then to take into account your position, I could say there are 2 impressions/images of the one self - one the self-image (who you think you are) and the other the other-image (who others think you are). The one true self, epistemologically, is either the self-image and/or the other-image Hence S_r = S_s + S_o