I wanted to discuss digital entities so to speak. — David Beames

Sounds interesting, what do you think about them?

The core of my approach is a system for ranking any “human representations of reality” by its weight across three criteria:

1. Universality — Scope of Applicability
A measure of how broadly a given idea X can functionally regulate different domains.
Universality prevents “Niche Blindness” (when an idea applies only within a narrow area while ignoring others). — Astorre

How would this be applied, for instance, on the ideas of the birth of a star and the beginning of life? Taking both as ideas about reality based on reality, they are both very "Niche" with little in common. Or does your new method only apply to certain areas of reality?

The nomadic idea of ​​"home" is tied not to the land, but to everyday life, loved ones, and life itself. — Astorre

I doubt that the concept of home even existed for the nomads They lived mostly where food was available and had little use for the personalized possessions usually found in homes. Early nomads lived in caves or built branch shelters against the sun and rain, they were abandoned when they moved on. Later nomads found that as they moved around, taking advantage of the different places where food was available, that they often returned to the same areas every year. This is when the started do build more solid structures out of stone, even when they still abandoned them as the food ran out they returned the following year to repair and improve.
The concept of home probably appeared when the started to settle down and grow enough crops to dedicate time to acquire belongings and needing a place to keep them.

In the history of the world, it was nomads who managed to build the largest (in terms of size) states, — Astorre

Could you give an example of a large nomadic group.

I really need to be more precise. I was thinking about forces used against people, not in terms of walls and trees. — Questioner

Walls are used as a weapon of force against people, and trees can be used to build them.

I was thinking of love as a constructive force and hate as a destructive force — Questioner

Trumps hate of Mexicans constructed a massive wall. My love of sunlight made me chop down 2 massive almond trees.

I think I will not remove them until the middle of January! — javi2541997

:rofl: :rofl: I left some up all year last year, just turned them on for a bit of fun when some friends came visiting.

I am a retired high school biology teacher, and one of the many things that I told my students is that everything about us survived in us because it gave us some kind of advantage in the environment in which we were living. — Questioner

I am a semi retired sociology and psychology introductory course high school teacher and I tried to teach basically the same thing.

Is hate an emotion, or is it more of an attitude, or a judgement? — Questioner

All three.

Does hate serve a purpose? — Questioner

It can keep you safe.

Why is it that both love and hate can result in both heroic and evil actions? — Questioner

I don't think that they can result in either. Heroics and evil actions mostly come from circumstance.

Are destruction and construction two sides of the same coin? — Questioner

Neither are relevant to the topic.

Is hate ever positive? Is love ever negative? — Questioner

Depends on whether you are applying the words to food or the person next door.

Feliz Navidad Javier. :wink: :party:

We didn't win the jackpot, but better luck next time! — javi2541997

But we did not lose anything either, well maybe you are out a few Euros, so everything is the same.

Happy Christmas to each and everyone of the members of this wonderful place of intellectual wealth.
Not being a believer does not make me a Grinch, I sincerely hope that all of the believers here are happy on this day and that the rest of us can consume sufficient booze and food to make up for not believing.
I am happy because I have about 2 thousand lights twinkling all over the house and I love the glow they make. Lots of shining coloured lights all over the place.

Good questions. And thereby hangs many a PhD. — Banno

Yep, but it does not answer the question. Those are ways of defining gender, but non offer a method of proving a persons gender, Do we just except their word for it?

While I have not ready every single post in the thread, I have followed the main posters comments.
I have a question, for anyone that cares to answer.
If there is an accepted difference between sex and gender, how do we prove them?
Sex seems to be pretty obvious, just look between their legs!
But how can gender, in the sense that it is being used here, be proven?

True? — frank

For the majority of politicians, doubtful. Even if the all say they do it to improve the lives of the people, I don't think it is out of compassion.

After seeing the piece of shit deal trump is offering the Ukraine, I think that maybe he just wants to make up with putin so that he can march into Venezuela without interference. He would then have his 51st state to brag about.

↪AmadeusD

I think that's what the lounge is for, a place to put to use our omniscience. That practice can be called omnipotence.

What does TDS stand for, Testosterone Deficiency Syndrome? — Metaphysician Undercover

Ditto, what he said. :lol:

The Romans? When can we have them over to the White House? — Metaphysician Undercover

There is already a contingent of their ideological brothers there. Their motto is "Keep the people busy watching the side shows and they will not notice you using the powers of state to increase your personal fortunes.

That's the thing. You can only push so far. — Metaphysician Undercover

And I don't think he is that capable. He couldn't push back against Putin with the whole world in his favor so I doubt that he will get far without international backing against Venezuela.

I don't think Trump gives a flying fuck about stopping the drug trade. — Metaphysician Undercover

Everyone knows that, why he is doing it though is another question.

He just uses it as leverage. You know, he'll keep up the attack, rationalizing it as being an attack on the drug trade, even threatening to take Maduro out if necessary, until he gets what he really wants from Maduro, in negotiations. — Metaphysician Undercover

That is one possible reason for doing it. But, just maybe he learned something from the Romans, keep the people happy and distracted with the circus. He does have a lot to cover up and he definitely needs the sheeple distracted from his future plans.

That's the way he works, through bullying. — Metaphysician Undercover

Yep, but not everyone fears him, in these parts he his seen as a bit of a clown. A clown with a big stick, but still a clown. And we still have to see how far he is going to be able to push the good people of the USA. He might just start a rebellion at home.

Probably he's after oil. He seems to be extraordinarily obsessed with keeping the price of fuel in the US low. I think he believes this will guarantee him the title of best president ever. The fuel in Venezuela could be the cheapest in the world. — Metaphysician Undercover

Always a possibility I suppose, but I don't think that will work out for him. I would need a full scale invasion and take over of the country, not just removing the president. To just set up a puppet leader in the country in hopes of getting favorable prices would probable start a civil war. Not everyone is against Maduro, but those that are will want a lot from trump to stop the drug trade. It is too important to a lot of peoples economic stability.

Trump uses drug trafficking as a reason to declare "national emergency". This declaration gives the government the power to avoid congress. He used fentanyl smuggling from Canada (estimated less than .01% of American fentanyl comes from Canada) as his excuse to declare a national emergency, allowing him the power required to impose tariffs on Canada. — Metaphysician Undercover

And failed miserable in his attempt to make a profit. But how do you think he is going to win anything when the tariffs he has against Venezuela, and the countries that import oil from there, have been in place for a while now and nothing has changed.

trump is just digging holes all over the place to shit in, but then he will come back and put his foot in the hole.

So how do you understand an ideology that says a certain race or group of people must be wiped out for the good of the world? — Tom Storm

If it is not your ideology, then you will probable never understand it. But it has been practiced since the beginning of human history. The only difference is that thousands of years ago small groups of humanoids killed off other small groups to make sure that their resources were not taken by them. Now it is by the thousands.

Is this merely a point of view? — Tom Storm

What else could it be, if they thought that by killing others that they could survive then that was their point of view. It might help to think about the other group having the same point of view.

Does it only become evil when the ideology is put into practice? — Tom Storm

Evil is a moral judgment of something that is believed by one group or another to be bad for them. Judgment of good or bad can only be made about actions, not thoughts, because they are the only things that can be proven through physical evidence. Even if I tell you what I am thinking, you still have no proof that it is true.

Ideologies in themselves cannot be evil. They are nothing more than a point of view. The actions that occur in the implementation of these ideologies can be classified as evil. Therefore the evil can only be used to classify those that participate in the implementation,not the ideologies themselves.
Everyone behaves according to some ideology or influence, whether it is an ancient book, common law, their own ideas, common sense or a Superman comic.
The intentions of a person involved in the implementation of any ideology is usually, from their point of view, are for the good of humanity according to their beliefs. Taking this into account, terrorists would not be classified as evil. The results of their actions would be ridding their world of the evil as defined by their ideology.
Consequentialism says that only the ramifications of the actions are judged. If the methods used in the implementation of any ideology are then to be taken into account to define it as evil, we would then be able say with a certain amount of surety that terrorists are evil.

Sinking of "narcoterrorist" ships, staging of large amounts of naval asset and news of covert operations inside Venezuela are signs of Washington playing it's games in America's back yard again. — ssu

I live quite close to all of this and we are to a certain degree involved with the drug runners. Honduras' governments have long been accused of aiding the drug lords of south American countries. One such president is currently a guest of the federal penitentiary service in the USA. Sinking a few of these boats is not going to make that much of a difference. Cars, trucks, shipping containers, drones and even horses carry more than a few boats could ever move.

Personally, I would have thought that trump, being such a good business man, would know about the rules of supply and demand, The only reason drug lords exist is because there are drug users.
Would it not be better to go after the users within their own borders than to be picking fights with foreign countries?

Basically, some empirical data suggests that our ancestors traditionally had a tail. Let's bring it back? — Astorre

Having a tail is not a tradition. :rofl: By that standard, "Most people have five fingers" would mean that it is traditional to have five fingers instead of biological.

When you proclaim communism, you discard traditionalism. Don't you think that nothing will fundamentally change? I'm referring to the replacement of one "belief" with another. — Astorre

Which is why communism does not really work. Most communities like their customs and traditions. When a communist government takes over, the traditions don't just disappear. They go underground and wait for the fad to pass. It takes a long time and the anhilation of the people to kill their traditions.

Traditionalists may be called fools, but very soon, when our advanced societies enter a gradual decline due to our desire to erode all identity and tradition, we will see others rise up—with beards and tambourines—and rule. — Astorre

Survival is the most important tradition, and it will always return and the old methods of living will come to the fore.

And my question here is, specifically, can these associations include causal connections? — J

Think of a spiders web, is there any part of it that is not connected to every other part of it? As memories are created there is a lot of information recorded about that event and are tied to it. If you later come across one of those details in other circumstances they will cause a connection to the other event.
Imagine that you are getting your first kiss, the place that you are at, the time of day, the music you are listening to, the food you eat, and many other details get recorded as well. Depending on the actual event the emotions you feel, like getting horny, embarrassment because your hornyness is showing will be recorded as well.

Now imagine being with your parents and the music that you heard during your first kiss starts playing. You might just get embarrassed again.

It might be any number of things -- a picture, a scent, a dream, Proust's cookie, or, of course, a previous thought. I'm not suggesting that only a previous thought can cause a current thought. The OP is asking into what might be going on when such a situation does appear to occur. — J

The "thought of Ann" might be a mental image, or her name, a memory associated with her -- I can only call upon your agreement here that something happens to which we refer when we say "All at once I thought of Ann and [now the words enter] wondered how she was doing". So this is thought A. And this, in turn, begins the process of reminding or causing which produces thought B -- I must get her a birthday present. — J

The processes of smelling and recognizing a scent or image would then be the unheard thought, a trigger or as you said "a mental event (presumably grounded in brain activity)" that activates the little voice in the head (W2) thought “All at once I thought of Ann”.

Not all thought processes are voices in our heads. When you touch something hot, the last thing you literally do is think "Shit, it's hot". The brain has already finished the processing of the information and taken the necessary actions.

Good question. But do you mean "thoughts" understood as my W2 thoughts, or thoughts as propositions? — J

To keep this use of “thought” distinct from the propositional content of a thought, I’ll call it a “W2 thought” from now on,

The "voice in the head" version would be what I'm calling a W2 thought. — J

Unheard thoughts? I think not, for purposes of this discussion. (I'm assuming you mean "unheard" metaphorically, so it translates to "thoughts I'm not aware of having.") — J

So what made you think of Ann (W2) in the first place?

What do we mean when we talk about “having a thought”, anyway? I’d also raise the question of whether asking “Can a Thought Cause Another Thought?” is clear enough, without first being much more specific about what we want “cause” to cover. — J

Do all thoughts have or need a cause? But first of all exactly what is a thought? Is it that voice we hear in our heard, or do we have unheard thoughts as well?

I feel the same about the bad names for women, and racist words; they all dehumanize people and maybe that is not okay. — Athena

Names are just words, it is the use they are given that is offensive.
It is funny to see how much of a difference there is between groups using the same words. A bunch of girls running around the bars at nights quite often use the term "slut" affectionately to show that they care about each other.
Groups of black people are often heard calling each other "niggers" and the whites "honkies"or 'whities". Only the ones used about the whites are used offensively by them. Neither group can use these words to members of the other group without it being racist. Weird.

The strange thing about that is that I have never heard anywhere white people calling each other "honkies" or 'whities". Maybe it is because there are plenty of other offensive names to use without them.

To which I answered:

First of all, compromising people's data is itself harmful, which then, in itself, causes the suffering of needing to worry about how one's data could be used for ill, once one is made aware of the data breach (as required under the GDPR). If you knew your ID and medical history was stolen that would cause suffering even if the data theft is never exploited to commit further crimes against you. — boethius — boethius

Breathing air in the street is harmful, but until you can show the damage done by it, there is no actual harm been done. The possibility is always there, like the trees killing people in parks these last few weeks, but until you can show that there is ACTUAL harm done by the things you explain in your theory nothing has happened.

Therefore, there is no reason to list every place I've already reported to, and making such a list public could potentially help perpetrators. No one should worry that they reported something that has already been reported. — boethius

Would it not be better if everyone in this forum made a report to the same people instead of us each sending a report to many different agencies in many different countries. Maybe they would listen if the got a couple of hundred reports about the same thing.

It is a low investment in time for people to report this information, and it is a low investment in time for any honest investigator to do some basic checks. — boethius

So you have done the checking, how many reports have you made and to whom have you done so? Being as there are so many possibilities to report this to so many different agencies and organizations I imagine that there has been a lot of work for you.
If you could post a list of the places that you have informed already, maybe some of us could repeat the information to them so that they would have to pay attention. Email addresses or whatever form of communication would be necessary for us to send to the same places.

What you got, as seen above, is exactly the answer to the question. — boethius

Is there any actual evidence that any children have suffered because of what you explained? — sir2u

I did not ask about possible future or imaginary consequences, it says quite clearly in the question I asked "actual evidence" of suffering.

This was already answered.

Is there any actual evidence that any children have suffered because of what you explained?
— Sir2u

First of all, compromising people's data is itself harmful, which then, in itself, causes the suffering of needing to worry about how one's data could be used for ill, once one is made aware of the data breach (as required under the GDPR). If you knew your ID and medical history was stolen that would cause suffering even if the data theft is never exploited to commit further crimes against you. — boethius


Then I answer the same question several more times. — boethius

Yep, that was the non-answer I got.

As of 2024, violence, burglary and car crime have been declining for 30 years and by close to 90%, according to the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) – our best indicator of true crime levels. Unlike police data, the CSEW is not subject to variations in reporting and recording.

Could that possibly be because shoplifting is now so easy and almost always prosecuted? It is much easier apparently to just walk into a store and walk out with a new article instead of breaking into someones house or car for a used article.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cq8z8kdd8zvo

Then consider the high levels of gun violence more generally that come with high levels of gun ownership. There are so many mass shootings, school shootings, and other gun homicides in the USA. Yet somehow their citizens are safer because they have a gun that they can putatively use in self-defence?

It seems like their defence of gun ownership is a fantasy that contradicts the actual facts.

I'll stick to what the statistics and studies show. My country is safer with strict gun control, and so I'm glad that we have it. — Michael

I agree with you entirely, BUT:

The United States is unique among wealthy nations in its vast private inventory of firearms. The nearly 200 million guns in private hands are used in part for recreation, mostly hunting and target shooting. But what engenders the most public controversy over firearms is their use against people during either the commission of or defense against crime.

https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles/165476.pdf

Some one is going to have a hell of a time taking them away from their owners. And the logistics to move and destroy them would be costly and time consuming. Someone probably already worked out that it is easier and cheaper to pay funerals and compensation for the nearly 50,000 victims each year.

Oh, absolutely. Thing is. In every single one of those places, you'll tend to find signs of brutal war, killing, rape, enslavement, or displacement of those who originally left them, many of which were non-combatants I.E "average Joes", specifically "average Janes" in regards to rape. — Outlander

Is there any new society that is different? They all want what they think is best for themselves and care little for anyone else. Prejudice and partiality are part of every group, from the coffeehouse reading club to the biggest countries in the world. Will all of these people having guns solve their differences?

Think about it. If you're a group of 1,000 people with 1,000 guns, and you want to "conquer" or "wage war" on a land of 10,000 people with an army of 2,000 who have 2,000 guns. That's something you might consider doing. You knows, you might win. — Outlander

That sounds like basic inter-gang warfare in downtown some place USA.

Now, if those 10,000 people each have 10,000 guns, you're outnumbered, and you'll look for easier prey. — Outlander

Well that looks like a lot of guns, 10,000 guns X 10,000 people is a a hundred million guns, Where are they going to put them all.
So you seem to believe that if everyone in the USA has a gun then no one will invade. But that does not explain who the hell would even want to invade the USA.
But if you take the time to consider the actual number of guns in the hands of bad guys and compare it to the number in the hands of the good guys, you might find that there are a lot more on the good side. Unfortunately, as you pointed out, the bad guys don't target them.

Humans have been creating civilizations and societies for thousands of years. Thousands of empires over thousands of years. None of them exist today. — Outlander

Civilizations, societies and empires are not the same things. Many empires and societies have disappeared, but there are still a few places where you can find the same cultural, customs and languages that made up those societies and have been around for thousands of years.

I wonder if they’ll ban 3D printers in Scotland since a kid was recently jailed there for plotting a mass shooting at his/her school. — NOS4A2

I doubt it, they are getting cheaper all the time so there must be a lot of them around, and you can buy all of the piece on ebay and build your own.

But what is most noticeable about the case is that he was a loudmouth and practically turned himself in to the police. How many are out there that are smarter that him that the police have no idea about?

The number of stabbings has risen as well, probably not too long to wait before it happens in a school. Using the US gun advocates logic, I real hope the teachers have bigger knives, as they seem to think that teachers with guns will prevent shootings.

And yet we haven't had a school shooting since strong gun control has been in place. — Michael

Keep your fingers crossed.

And I’d much prefer it if they don’t have access to guns, even if that means I don’t have access to guns either. — Michael

Sorry to disillusion you about this, but the bad guys will always get weapons while weapons continue to exist.

I’m happy with the UK law on gun ownership. It’s not because I don’t believe in rights; it’s because I think that private gun ownership is too dangerous. — Michael

The UK does seem to be having a lot of machete and knife fights on city streets now though don't they. When I left England almost 50 years ago, this was almost unheard of. But , as I said before, the bad guys will always find weapons to use against the average man in the street.

B.S.

Did you see the movie “Contact” with Jodi Foster? They had a similar alien text problem. The aliens built in a decryption key to help other intelligent species learn the language. Neat movie. — Fire Ologist

The key was probably contained in the etchings on the sphere, and a key part was where they cut the whole to remove the book.

Liability is simply the potential to be held accountable and where. So discussions of liability are about what you could possibly be sued, fined or imprisoned for, and where exactly that can occur. — boethius

And how many perfectly legal companies are involved in child trafficking? Or, are there illegal groups acting as legal companies to commit crimes?

To save time for anyone interested — boethius

Nope, all I want to know is, does any evidence exist that what you have spent so much time writing about is actually doing any harm so that I can ask my next question.