Comments

  • Feature requests
    Most these discussions involve argumentation. In my opinion, what is important is not the assertion but the argument which supports the assertion. To put the assertions in bold is just an annoyance, like someone shouting at you.Metaphysician Undercover
    I think this is one of the things that's wrong with modern philosophy. It's not the argument - but the insight that counts. Argumentation is merely a form of presentation - maybe a way of convincing someone by tying a conclusion with other beliefs that someone already has - thus convincing them how the new belief (conclusion) fits in the environment of what he already knows about the world (premises).

    It's insight that makes you a great philosopher - not the ability to be argumentative. I'm scouring for insights, arguments are secondary.
  • Feature requests
    You like skimming the text, reading only what the author presents as the important ideas.Metaphysician Undercover
    At first. If there's anything important there, I will read everything.

    How do you know that your idea of what is important is the same as the author's?Metaphysician Undercover
    If the author is worth reading, he should at least be aware of what his message is, otherwise how can he attempt to convey it? If he's aware of his message, then I'll get an idea of it from his main points. Then if that idea is sufficiently convincing, I will read what follows.

    So my idea of what's important doesn't matter. All I care is what is this author trying to communicate - and is it important?
  • Feature requests
    It made his posts unreadable.jamalrob
    For you, which is fine. You are free to disagree and have your own opinion. But there's a long way from having your own opinion, and thinking that other opinions aren't even worth hearing.

    I, for example, loved 180 Proof's posts precisely because he made effective use of fonts, styles, colors, etc. to emphasise the important ideas - someone could get it almost at a single glance.
  • Feature requests
    It would be messy, and communication depends on common standards, especially common standards of presentation.jamalrob
    Right - you can check out other forums then. I don't remember old PF being messy, or somehow being affected by the "lack of common standards of presentation". I used colors and headlines several times there, and it was very successful, no one said anything. I remember several people, including 180 Proof, using colors and different font sizes too!

    Are you saying that, e.g., the World as Will and Representation would have been better if Schopenhauer had been able to get it printed in his favourite purple Comic Sans?jamalrob
    Books aren't the only way of presenting philosophical ideas, and forum posts are nothing like books, so the comparison you're making is besides the point. If I present the ideas of WWR as a poster for example, do you think I'll fill it up with text like a book? Of course not. I will differentiate with shocking images, different font sizes, colors, etc. the important ideas, so that they can be understood at a single glance. And above all that, Comic Sans isn't even a good choice for presenting something like WWR - so if someone chose that, tough luck, he'd most likely be ignored.

    Those who are skilled can make effective use of styling elements. It seems you think it's trolling, but there's absolutely no reason to take that stand. You should simply be aware that many forums are doing this, and they're not having problems because of it. There's nothing messy about centring text, using colors, etc.

    As for your insinuations that I'm trolling, or somehow these ideas don't deserve respect - that's bullshit. And you know it, or at least you should know it.
  • What criteria do the mods use?
    Yeah, sorry I didn't know those peeps who keep their eyes glued to the TV screen have a personality :P

    I'm part of those who appear on TV, not those who watch it (jk lol)
  • What is the core of Corbyn's teaching? Compare & Contrast
    Inbred? Is that supposed to be something disgusting?
  • What criteria do the mods use?

    I have no clue who that guy is ;) You can tell I never watch TV.
  • What is the core of Corbyn's teaching? Compare & Contrast
    I voted for UKIP. I appreciate the bait and switch though ;)
  • Feature requests
    No, that would be terrible. I'm baffled that anyone thinks it would be good.jamalrob
    Okay, I get it you don't like it, but my question is why not, and what does that have to do with web development?
  • What criteria do the mods use?
    but I could appear to many outsiders as a raging amazonian genius who screams and eats whole cooked chickens while slushing down a pot of ale.TimeLine
    And you do >:O
  • Feature requests
    This goes against your case, because it's an argument for good design, under the control of a web designer, which is the opposite of what you're asking for.jamalrob
    For web pages, not for the content inside posts. If I post something I should be able to decide if it's green or yellow, or whatever. Maybe I want to make this WORD red, for emphasis. Maybe I want it to be centred:

    BAM - THIS IS A BIG CENTRED HEADLINE
    This is so great you just can't refuse it!

    See? I can't even centre that (and it looks disgusting as left-aligned). Maybe I want my post to have multiple chapters - someone can skim read through all my ideas and read only what they're interested in, etc. etc.

    I mean most forums do this.
  • Feature requests
    And I can't get over the fact that you work in web development and yet you think it's cool for users to be able to change the font and text colourjamalrob
    Why not? You are aware that most forums have word processors for posts right (at least the other non-philosophy forums I've been on do, and I remember you could change colors, etc. in old PF too)? Of course on a random web page you don't want people to change the font, etc. of what's already on the page, that would be insane and mess the layout. But a post would live in its own div, you should be able to play with the layout inside as much as you want.

    A lot of developers don't pay adequate attention to graphic + typographic design, but I don't understand why not. These are essential elements that should be incorporated and thought out in each design. Most people just stick Montserrat or Roboto with 2 lines of code and then forget about fonts, but that's the wrong approach. The right font + the right graphic design significantly increases conversions, and most clients don't want websites just to look cool, or work cool - they want them to sell for them.
  • What criteria do the mods use?
    That would mean people like you stepping up to the plate. You too could be a moderator!Bitter Crank
    No, I actually don't think I'm fit to be a moderator, but I would have other people to propose: Mariner, Thorongil, yourself, John and a few more! I'd aim for a mix between theist/atheist, progressive/conservative, just to make everything fair.

    Oops, verbosity reach critical stage... must stop.Bitter Crank
    >:O
  • Drowning Humanity
    they could have separated their academic pursuits from their beliefs, basically being disingenuous with themselves for the sake of avoiding cognitive dissonance.Noblosh
    Okay, can you prove this? This is a possibility, but why do you reject accepting the opposite possibility: namely that they really had ample reasons for believing in God?
  • What criteria do the mods use?
    It really is no big deal, but I suppose there'll always be those who kick up a fuss - and they'll probably be joined by the likes of Agustino and Thorongil, who, in such circumstances, seem unable to resist an opportunity to stick their oar in, and jump at the chance to criticise moderator action.Sapientia
    You have that wrong, I'm all for a strong moderating team, but not for unnecessary interventions.
  • What criteria do the mods use?
    There are many websites catering to the lowest common denominator, in every category of website you can think of. The achievement here lies in rising above the LCD and aiming for "mid-brow" quality. "High brow" quality (sites like Stanford University's Encyclopedia of Philosophy) requires major institutional support.Bitter Crank
    Okay, I agree with all that. The target of this forum, the way I see it, is anyone seriously interested in a philosophy. That's what I mean (and thought Benkei meant) by LCD.

    Their's is a tremendous contribution to the quality, consistency, and vitality of the site.Bitter Crank
    No doubt that moderating is important, and I agree the moderating team had been doing a good job initially. However, as the forum has grown and pressures have lessened (in terms of will the site be able to survive?), the quality of the moderation has degraded. There are several reasons for this:

    • The obvious one - each member becomes less important when you have a way to get new members that's reliable and hard to overcome (organic reach) - thus moderators can enforce stricter standards, and even show bias, something that just wouldn't have made sense initially.
    • People who moderated old PF have been appointed moderators here - which is a problem because that brought with it the same problems old PF was plagued by - the same kind of mindset.
    • Moderators ALL share virtually the same religious outlook (atheists) - thus they cannot be unbiased, nor are they fully capable to determine what are good quality phil. of religion posts.
    • Moderators (7 out of 8) are leftists, and therefore the forum carries a heavier political bias, with right-leaning views not being accepted or tolerated sufficiently - that's why innocent people like Emptyheady got banned - which is also the reason I had stopped posting in protest.
    • Moderators never admit to being wrong (or better said, they're self-righteous) - which has caused schisms within the community, and has alienated some members, including, for example, the thread starter here.

    Hopefully those points above are all clear. The solution?

    Have a wider variety of moderators, holding different views, in order to ensure that as many people in the community as possible are adequately represented. Maybe even hold moderator elections. Decide on some standards for who can run (by post count, nomination, etc.) - cause we don't want someone who just came around to run for example - and do it. Moderators can then switch around, and the community can be adequately represented.

    You saw the recent polls by Thorongil. There's a lot more right-leaning and religious people than we would have thought around. These people are being quiet for a reason, because their views aren't accepted in a friendly way. Not everyone is willing to fight like myself.

    Everything isn't a business; there are other models. I'd say we are an "enterprise of common interest". That any enterprise might have to rent a room or a server and software in which to meet doesn't make us a "business".Bitter Crank
    Okay, I didn't mean that we're a business in the sense of we're out here to make money. So don't misinterpret that. But we are out here to maintain & grow this community - hopefully - and if we're not, then I think we should be.

    The Philosophy Forum caters to the needs of people who want a reasonably orderly, not academic but reasonably serious place to discuss philosophical ideas. The moderators and contributors make it "reasonably orderly" and "reasonably serious" or not.Bitter Crank
    Yes, yes, I agree with this.

    I don't think anybody here is running a vendetta against you.Bitter Crank
    Okay, but I didn't refer to people who just disagree with my positions. Yes, of course they're not running a vendetta, they're just expressing their views, just as I am. But some people do take things personally and are running a vendetta, I know that for a fact.

    Don't take equally vigorous offense responses as vendettasBitter Crank
    I don't - when they're about the issue, or even about myself in the context of the issue, I take no beef with it. But some people pop into threads out of nowhere just to insult (instead of add value or discuss the issue) - that, now, is a personal vendetta, that they should at least admit to.
  • Feature requests
    Formatting and style is not the writer's concern.jamalrob
    Ok, understood. Formatting and style though is a means of communication too, and as such, it is a writer's concern. One of the things that I think has brought philosophy down in the past is that the content is there, but the FORM isn't used to reflect and support it as effectively as possible.
  • What criteria do the mods use?
    A community should have rules and respect.Sapientia
    You are right about that, I agree.

    It isn't respectful to the creator of the discussion to fill up their discussion with low-quality or off-topic posts which get in the way of having the proper discussion which the creator of that discussion evidently desired, nor should it be tolerated by moderators.Sapientia
    Well I think the posts weren't getting in the way of anything. Actually quite the contrary: the thread is now long forgotten (almost off the first page) and those "off-topic" jokes etc. certainly got the thread starter more clicks on his thread by virtue of keeping it at the top for longer - and hence more people getting a chance to read his opening post. So the jokes were actually benefiting him - and if we were in a court of law, certainly an argument could be very successfully made that in this particular situation the benefit most certainly exceeded the harm.

    If someone is interested to contribute, they are not harmed at all by the slightly off-topic posts. I mean, do you believe that I will stop having a proper discussion with you here because X, Y or Z starts talking about what a great night they had at the movies (completely off-topic this time)? I will just ignore them. Read the first two words of their post, see what it is about, and move on. But obviously I don't think completely off-topic posts should be allowed, but just giving a more extreme example so you understand.

    Do you think, Sapientia, that there's something wrong if a thread has multiple conversations going on inside? I see this quite frequently. There are threads in which I participate where I'm speaking with say 2-3 other participants, and while that convo is going on, 2-3 others are speaking about something completely different - and I actually have no clue what exactly they're speaking about because I never read their conversation (well, usually).

    Like look in this thread. I'm having a separate discussion with you, then TimeLine is making a separate comment to Seagull, etc. A thread is like a dinner party with multiple tables inside. People can move around, and go from table to table as they desire. When someone cusses at me - like Benkei - then obviously I will go off-topic to address it. But that doesn't ruin the rest of the thread, it's just like what would happen in an actual conversation.
  • Philosophy of depression.
    No, you mean they always invent reasons why something can't be done, coming up with constraints they're not actually under.Noblosh
    Not necessarily - they may also overestimate the constraints they're under, blow them out of proportions.

    Your rhetoric suggests that willpower alone can break constraints one step at a time.Noblosh
    Willpower can break passivity and inaction.

    You may negate any of your attempts at persuasion and may neither take advices nor complaints from me but your "God gave you that so you have the duty to" paradigm surely doesn't fool me.Noblosh
    Does it mean I'm trying to persuade every single time I tell you something about my own beliefs? I don't think so. Even an atheist can understand the meaning of "God gave you that so you have the duty to" -> you didn't create yourself nor are you responsible entirely for who you are - so you have a duty to the world (which gave you everything).
  • What criteria do the mods use?
    To which I then replied, which you then bring back to your original point to point out you really don't have a point except sharing another useless opinion how things should work according to Agustino.Benkei
    Big surprise! Did you expect me to tell you how things should work according to my grandmother?! >:O
  • Philosophy of depression.
    Bin there, done that, got the scars. "I am not the sort of person that walks out when the relationship gets difficult." - is an attractive identity, that might look from the outside more like a doormat.unenlightened
    Depends. If you have strength of character you won't be a doormat. You'll be an invitation to something more. A doormat is characterised by need - a doormat is captive to their needs, self-centered and will do anything to get them fulfilled. A doormat is obsessed and attached to winning.

    A great man on the other hand can tolerate the pettiness of those smaller than them because he doesn't need anything from them. The person who doesn't need anything from the world has conquered the world. He is free. He is always a winner, because if the world refuses him, he never gives up. That person can demand from the world, and the world will do all it can to fulfil his demands - because it will be in awe at his character. He will start by being laughed at, but soon he will be seen as a god amongst men. The character of a great man overcomes the pettiness of those around him. His willingness to suffer, his willingness to go to the very ends of the world. The way he gambles with his life, as if it were nothing - a petty thing to be thrown away - that is what raises him above the rest.
  • What criteria do the mods use?
    We're not looking for converts either as you seem to imply.Benkei
    And you're proud of that? >:O In either case, I never implied that. You seem to have reading difficulties. Or comprehension difficulties. Either way, just to remind you:
    either have no interest to grow it, or if they do, they don't understand how to go about itAgustino

    What opportunities? This isn't a business, in case you hadn't noticed.Benkei
    Everything is a business. Even a Church is a business. Any community is a business. Any organism is either growing or dying. To grow effectively, and in a lasting manner, it must cater to the needs of its people. It's quite simple. I know you have a personal vendetta against me, but it's not my fault that you can't put 2 and 2 together.

    But I suspect you'll be around telling everybody else what to do without having any real accomplishments to your own name.Benkei
    >:O >:O >:O - you're talking to me about accomplishments? Don't make me laugh. Please. Before you make more of a fool of yourself look close to home. How much value have you added to this community? Think about that ;)
  • What criteria do the mods use?
    This forum doesn't intend to cater to the lowest possible denominator.Benkei
    That's the kind of thinking that misses opportunities. Anyone who is interested in philosophy should be hooked in - it's not the healthy that are in need of a doctor, but the sick.
  • What criteria do the mods use?
    All my replies in that thread were deleted.

    Mod's ways are not our ways.Thorongil

    It seems that the mods are pushing this place to become more academic and less communal. That is a mistake.

    This is not what most people who participate on this forum want. A forum isn't an academic journal, and mixing the two doesn't work.

    In the beginning, they allowed any kind of post pretty much (apart from obvious flaming, swearing, advertising, etc.). But with time, they've been tightening the standards, because the forum grew, and it's ranked #1 on Google for "philosophy forum", so it's much easier to be found organically.

    It's a pity, but many of the people running this forum either have no interest to grow it, or if they do, they don't understand how to go about it (hint: give people what they want).
  • Feature requests
    This place looks better when it's more uniform.Sapientia
    it would make the place a messBaden
  • Does your current job utilize your education?
    Why would I go out of my way looking for work?Sapientia
    Well do you want to think of yourself as someone who doesn't want to work, and will cut corners if possible? Or do you want to be proud of yourself that you're always giving your best and doing high quality work?

    It wouldn't be a good use of my time for me if I can slack off and get away with itSapientia
    If I was after a promotion or something and trying to impress my boss, then yes. Otherwise no.Sapientia
    I'm not sure this is the right attitude to have. You shouldn't work just for the money or just for impressing the boss. You should take pride in your work - do it for yourself, not for your boss. With some of my clients for example, they ask me for X, and I give them 2X, with the additional X free. Why, what do I get? Well nothing pretty much - but it makes my clients happy, and it makes me glad I've done great work - that I put my heart and soul in it, and someone found it useful - I've helped another person.

    Do it for yourself. Don't you want to think "Ah Sapientia is great! Whatever work he's given, he gives his best, and is committed to get great results for others!"?

    Sure, there are some people out there who will try to abuse your kindness. But then it's their loss really. You should also consider not to turn into that which you hate. If you think your boss is abusing your work - then don't in turn abuse him by doing bad work, or cutting corners - don't be like him. You have your own values.

    The other thing is, that people can catch on to attitudes. If you begrudgingly accept and do work, then even if you try to hide it, it still shows. Working for yourself - being proud of your work, and seeking to do your best - will show, and you'll end up doing better and being happier as well in the long run. At least that's been my experience. Take it or leave it.

    Sorry if that was snappy.Sapientia
    No worries.
  • Philosophy of depression.
    These are all belief's about oneself and the world. Simply saying that none of them are true is just rubbish because one (a depressed individual) already supposes them valid on face value.Question
    Okay I understand you. So can a depressed person provide reasons for considering those beliefs valid at face value? For example:

    • Why is it that you feel powerless?
    • Why is it that you feel lousy?
    • Why is it that you think you can't change?
    • Why is it that you think you can't fulfil desires?
    • Why do you even need to fulfil all desires?

    Is a depressed person willing to, scientifically, suspend judgement and question those beliefs through actions?

    Powerless: go run for whatever you think is a long time for you. Push yourself to do something that makes you feel uncomfortable and you feel you can't do. Feel all the uncomfortable feelings, the feeling of giving up, etc. but ignore them.
    Lousy: Eat right. Exercise. Do something you enjoy - a small thing, something easy to do. Help someone, and then ask them how they felt. Pause and ask yourself how you're feeling.
    Think you can't change: Find a way to change in something small. Can you exercise for 20 mins every day and stick to it? If you can, then there you go, you show your mind that it's possible.
    Can't fulfil desires: Think of a regular desire you have - the desire to eat ice-cream for example. Fulfil it, and pay attention, in the moment, to the joy you get out of fulfilling it.

    Remember that mountains are climbed step by step - you don't hop from the bottom to the very top in one go. You can't question your beliefs purely in an intellectual way - you have to make your body FEEL that your beliefs are wrong. That level of feeling is different than merely considering matters abstractly in your head. That's why I've emphasised doing something - taking action!
  • Feature requests
    One thing I totally hate about the interface of this forum is that there's no adequate text editor. I can't centre text, can't wrap text around images, use different fonts, change font size, etc. It would make communicating stuff more interesting if we had a Word document kind of interface which gave you full flexibility.
  • Philosophy of depression.
    My personal opinion:

    The difficulty with depression is the same difficulty as that which is found with losing weight, making money, finding the right woman, etc.

    The principles that are required to solve each are simple. But most people don't put in the effort (both intellectual and physical) required to get through with them OR they're not willing to go through the physical and emotional pain necessary to solve them - why don't they? There can be multiple reasons, but all return to a lack of self-esteem and a fear of pain/suffering.

    To develop self-esteem you must start by loving yourself, accepting yourself for who you are, and treating your body and mind with compassion, kindness and care. You have to develop an affirming vision of yourself, and find problems in the world that you can use your talents to solve (that gives you purpose).

    To stop being afraid of pain/suffering it helps to have strong moral values that you don't deviate from, to be religious (just because the religious can view it as a duty to accept whatever God allots them), to have no expectations, and to stop thinking you deserve something different than what you have. In other words, stop being self-focused, and be world or other-focused.

    Why do you think people read these words and don't act on them?
  • Philosophy of depression.
    Hadn't heard that Jacques had passed. Sad to hear that. Though what more could one ask from him after 101 years? Rest in Peace/Vacation in Paradise!0 thru 9
    Exactly.


    Yes, agreed.
  • Philosophy of depression.
    If they don't believe they are in control and are at the mercy of external events, telling them to snap out of it probably will not work.Bitter Crank
    Okay, so then you agree the work is in changing their beliefs - namely that their beliefs are at fault for their condition. Would I be right in saying that?

    People are sometimes taught passivity and inability, but fairly often we teach ourselves further lessons of inability. We structure our thinking about our 'situation' as a no-win negative situation, and then we get stuck. Maybe we don't like our job and we don't believe there are good and better jobs out there. We don't do well at the job, then people at work get angry at us, but we don't care, and down the spiral we go. We could change our ideas about work, jobs, and our place in them -- without giving up everything else we believe.Bitter Crank
    Exactly, so it's our beliefs that influence the outcomes to these situations we're discussing.

    Maybe she wishes that her children would pay more attention to her at Christmas, Thanksgiving, her birthday, or Mothers Day. They habitually don't, but every year she expects that they will, and is freshly crushed each year when they don't -- once again -- perform as desired. She gets angry each time, and reaffirms her suspicion that her children don't care about her, and down the spiral she goes. She could revise her expectations and recognize that her children probably won't fulfill her expectations.Bitter Crank
    Yes, I agree with this as well. This is an important part, but, I believe it is secondary to having affirming and positive beliefs. Beliefs are the sword, having no expectations is the shield. What do I mean?

    Beliefs push you to try to do whatsoever you wish to do - a feeling of certainty is probably the best way to get yourself to undertake an action (or a series of actions). But in case you fail, you'll become depressed if you don't balance this with having no expectations. Having no expectations is a meta-cognitive renunciation that occurs when you realise that God (or the world if you're an atheist) doesn't owe you anything to begin with.

    There was a time when I had very strong beliefs, combined with very strong expectations, and I can say for certain that that leads to a lot of negativity, depression, anxiety, etc.

    If we don't recognize the constraints we're under, positive thinking can lead us so far. We can better our condition with that type of thinking, sure, but that's not what depressed people crave for, they crave for purpose, not status and you fail to understand that and so your commentary is off the point.Noblosh
    Yes, but how can you not recognise the constraints you're under? Most people are very good at this part - too good. They always find the reasons why something can't be done.

    And I do understand (some) of the depressed crave for purpose and meaning. But that purpose and meaning emerges once they come to terms with themselves. Once they understand their own self in a positive and affirming way. Once they have can-do beliefs - once they start valuing themselves, instead of putting themselves down. It all comes back to self-esteem.

    I just came back from the gym / martial arts routine and let me tell you - the human body is such a phenomenal creation of God - you can always push it beyond its limits, it always obeys, even when it can't go on anymore. How much more capable our bodies are than we give them credit. Some people are depressed because they're fat, they're feeling fatigued, etc. all day long. But God didn't make them like that. God gave them absolutely all the tools they need. It's not their body that is at fault, but the spirit. The poor body has no option but to obey the spirit - and a sluggish, lazy spirit leads to a fat and unhealthy body.

    Yes it is true that some, because of health reasons, simply can't use their bodies in the same ways as others. Each has a duty only to work with the resources they are given, and no more. The rest of us owe it to help those people, but even these people - their body can often do a lot more than they think it can.

    So I was just reflecting. How enjoyable to feel the vigor and strength running through your body, to feel that you can rely on it, that it can take you wherever you ask it. Spinoza was right - we enjoy the power and strength of our body, and whatsoever increases it, brings us joy.

    But yes - it wasn't for no reason that I told the depressed people in this thread to go for a run. They need to do that to snap out of the cycle where their self-esteem is going to the bottom. They need to push themselves, and see that they can achieve and do things that they thought were impossible. They need to go through those moments, where they can barely take another step, and yet push themselves, and see that it is possible to go another step, and another. That's a win for them afterwards. Add more and more wins each and every day, and soon their self-esteem will be back up!
  • Philosophy of depression.
    it gives you the false impression that you're in control, fully responsible for both your successes and your failures when people in fact depend on each other and are affected by external circumstances for better or worst. We're not free just because we think we are, we're in a constant constraint by factors beyond our direct control.Noblosh
    False impression or not isn't even what's under the discussion. What's under discussion is solely what brings the best performance in you? What maximises your chances of escaping your current circumstances for some better ones? What maximises your chances of beating the odds?

    Clearly being pessimistic, negative, and acutely aware of what's holding you back won't do that. Say I want to create a new church community. If I start thinking about all the things holding me back - no experience, not enough money, etc. - I will never do it. I'm guaranteed in fact to never do it. But if I start thinking I can do it, and start asking useful questions instead of complaining, such as "what steps can I take now to do it? Who do I need to contact and who could help me? etc." I actually stand a chance - regardless of how small - of doing it. Even if my conviction was based on no evidence at all.

    Take Ghandi. Do you think Ghandi would ever have freed India had he started thinking "ahh the British Empire is too strong, there is no chance. Let's just give up, we're a smaller and weaker nation, we don't have any weapons, there's nothing we can do"? Clearly not. He would have ended up some sorry and depressed man. What helped him achieve the impossible was nothing but his sheer conviction, and strength of will in believing that it was possible, and then seeking to do anything in his power to make that possibility true. He had no evidence as such for believing it... but it's the belief that made the evidence possible, and not the other way around.
  • Philosophy of depression.
    Political persuasion is considered evangelism by the site guidelines. But I'm really not the one to judge what would constitute an offense on this site, I've just given you an advice.Noblosh
    And? Where have I evangelised? I just made the point that a certain political persuasion is disempowering - I made no reference to whether it's true, worth holding, the right or wrong one etc. There are beliefs which are disempowering, and that's just a fact. If you believe that because of so and so factor of your environment (say discrimination, racism, etc.) you are depressed or in a bad situation, then that is disempowering. It's because of that situation that you are depressed, it's not within your control - so you don't do anything except cry about your disadvantages. But, if your belief, on the other hand, is that how I feel, and how I react depends on myself - I am in control - and not whatever external circumstance, then that is empowering - it allows you to free yourself.

    If you need proof of communism being disempowering, just look at the Eastern European countries that have been ravaged by it - you'll see more negative and pessimistic thinking there than anywhere else.

    And by the way, that small point about communism was 0.01% of my post. That was a secondary point more than anything else. And just some advice from me: I don't think you're in any position to judge or give me advice about forum rules, etc. You barely have 30 posts, you're a new member, take your time and understand how things go around here first. If any of the moderators think there's a problem with my post, I'm sure they could contact me by PM about it, and it will be settled.
  • Philosophy of depression.
    Evangelism is against the site guidelines, so tread carefully.Noblosh
    I did not evangelise at all, I didn't ask anyone to convert to Christianity. In fact, the video I posted is of a hard-core atheist (Jacques Fresco) whom I admire. The book I posted also has nothing to do with Christianity. So please. Get your facts straight. Mr. No Blushin'.
  • Poll: Political affiliation of this forum
    You're right, I meant patriarchy, sorry.Noblosh
    Please provide an argument showing that right ideology argues for patriarchy.

    I dare you to come up with something to support that claim of yours, like an argument. For example, just because I reject traditionalism doesn't mean I embrace modernism so try not to make that fallacy, if you're going to argumentate, of course.Noblosh
    I just did - the fact that you use unsupported leftist memes (such as the Right being patriarchal) shows that you are a leftist, despite your protestations.
  • Philosophy of depression.
    And remember the story of Job. Who the hell are you to complain and ask why you're suffering, etc.? God rules the Universe as he pleases, we are nothing but straw dogs. That's where philosophy must end. God told Job no point arguing with me. Who are you to question my decisions? I am the Lord your God, and if I decide to let you suffer, then you will suffer. Your duty is to play your role, and do your best with what you're given. That's it.

    1 Then the Lord spoke to Job out of the storm. He said:
    2 “Who is this that obscures my plans
    with words without knowledge?
    3 Brace yourself like a man;
    I will question you,
    and you shall answer me.
    4 “Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation?
    Tell me, if you understand.
    5 Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know!
    Who stretched a measuring line across it?
    6 On what were its footings set,
    or who laid its cornerstone—
    7 while the morning stars sang together
    and all the angels shouted for joy?
    8 “Who shut up the sea behind doors
    when it burst forth from the womb,
    9 when I made the clouds its garment
    and wrapped it in thick darkness,
    10 when I fixed limits for it
    and set its doors and bars in place,
    11 when I said, ‘This far you may come and no farther;
    here is where your proud waves halt’?
    12 “Have you ever given orders to the morning,
    or shown the dawn its place,
    13 that it might take the earth by the edges
    and shake the wicked out of it?
    14 The earth takes shape like clay under a seal;
    its features stand out like those of a garment.
    15 The wicked are denied their light,
    and their upraised arm is broken.
    16 “Have you journeyed to the springs of the sea
    or walked in the recesses of the deep?
    17 Have the gates of death been shown to you?
    Have you seen the gates of the deepest darkness?
    18 Have you comprehended the vast expanses of the earth?
    Tell me, if you know all this.
    19 “What is the way to the abode of light?
    And where does darkness reside?
    20 Can you take them to their places?
    Do you know the paths to their dwellings?
    21 Surely you know, for you were already born!
    You have lived so many years!
    22 “Have you entered the storehouses of the snow
    or seen the storehouses of the hail,
    23 which I reserve for times of trouble,
    for days of war and battle?
    24 What is the way to the place where the lightning is dispersed,
    or the place where the east winds are scattered over the earth?
    25 Who cuts a channel for the torrents of rain,
    and a path for the thunderstorm,
    26 to water a land where no one lives,
    an uninhabited desert,
    27 to satisfy a desolate wasteland
    and make it sprout with grass?
    28 Does the rain have a father?
    Who fathers the drops of dew?
    29 From whose womb comes the ice?
    Who gives birth to the frost from the heavens
    30 when the waters become hard as stone,
    when the surface of the deep is frozen?
    31 “Can you bind the chains of the Pleiades?
    Can you loosen Orion’s belt?
    32 Can you bring forth the constellations in their seasons
    or lead out the Bear with its cubs?
    33 Do you know the laws of the heavens?
    Can you set up God’s dominion over the earth?
    34 “Can you raise your voice to the clouds
    and cover yourself with a flood of water?
    35 Do you send the lightning bolts on their way?
    Do they report to you, ‘Here we are’?
    36 Who gives the ibis wisdom
    or gives the rooster understanding?
    37 Who has the wisdom to count the clouds?
    Who can tip over the water jars of the heavens
    38 when the dust becomes hard
    and the clods of earth stick together?
    39 “Do you hunt the prey for the lioness
    and satisfy the hunger of the lions
    40 when they crouch in their dens
    or lie in wait in a thicket?
    41 Who provides food for the raven
    when its young cry out to God
    and wander about for lack of food?
    39 “Do you know when the mountain goats give birth?
    Do you watch when the doe bears her fawn?
    2 Do you count the months till they bear?
    Do you know the time they give birth?
    3 They crouch down and bring forth their young;
    their labor pains are ended.
    4 Their young thrive and grow strong in the wilds;
    they leave and do not return.
    5 “Who let the wild donkey go free?
    Who untied its ropes?
    6 I gave it the wasteland as its home,
    the salt flats as its habitat.
    7 It laughs at the commotion in the town;
    it does not hear a driver’s shout.
    8 It ranges the hills for its pasture
    and searches for any green thing.
    9 “Will the wild ox consent to serve you?
    Will it stay by your manger at night?
    10 Can you hold it to the furrow with a harness?
    Will it till the valleys behind you?
    11 Will you rely on it for its great strength?
    Will you leave your heavy work to it?
    12 Can you trust it to haul in your grain
    and bring it to your threshing floor?
    13 “The wings of the ostrich flap joyfully,
    though they cannot compare
    with the wings and feathers of the stork.
    14 She lays her eggs on the ground
    and lets them warm in the sand,
    15 unmindful that a foot may crush them,
    that some wild animal may trample them.
    16 She treats her young harshly, as if they were not hers;
    she cares not that her labor was in vain,
    17 for God did not endow her with wisdom
    or give her a share of good sense.
    18 Yet when she spreads her feathers to run,
    she laughs at horse and rider.
    19 “Do you give the horse its strength
    or clothe its neck with a flowing mane?
    20 Do you make it leap like a locust,
    striking terror with its proud snorting?
    21 It paws fiercely, rejoicing in its strength,
    and charges into the fray.
    22 It laughs at fear, afraid of nothing;
    it does not shy away from the sword.
    23 The quiver rattles against its side,
    along with the flashing spear and lance.
    24 In frenzied excitement it eats up the ground;
    it cannot stand still when the trumpet sounds.
    25 At the blast of the trumpet it snorts, ‘Aha!’
    It catches the scent of battle from afar,
    the shout of commanders and the battle cry.
    26 “Does the hawk take flight by your wisdom
    and spread its wings toward the south?
    27 Does the eagle soar at your command
    and build its nest on high?
    28 It dwells on a cliff and stays there at night;
    a rocky crag is its stronghold.
    29 From there it looks for food;
    its eyes detect it from afar.
    30 Its young ones feast on blood,
    and where the slain are, there it is.”
    40 The Lord said to Job:

    2 “Will the one who contends with the Almighty correct him?
    Let him who accuses God answer him!”
    3 Then Job answered the Lord:

    4 “I am unworthy—how can I reply to you?
    I put my hand over my mouth.
    5 I spoke once, but I have no answer—
    twice, but I will say no more.”
    6 Then the Lord spoke to Job out of the storm:

    7 “Brace yourself like a man;
    I will question you,
    and you shall answer me.
    8 “Would you discredit my justice?
    Would you condemn me to justify yourself?
    9 Do you have an arm like God’s,
    and can your voice thunder like his?
    10 Then adorn yourself with glory and splendor,
    and clothe yourself in honor and majesty.
    11 Unleash the fury of your wrath,
    look at all who are proud and bring them low,
    12 look at all who are proud and humble them,
    crush the wicked where they stand.
    13 Bury them all in the dust together;
    shroud their faces in the grave.
    14 Then I myself will admit to you
    that your own right hand can save you.
    15 “Look at Behemoth,
    which I made along with you
    and which feeds on grass like an ox.
    16 What strength it has in its loins,
    what power in the muscles of its belly!
    17 Its tail sways like a cedar;
    the sinews of its thighs are close-knit.
    18 Its bones are tubes of bronze,
    its limbs like rods of iron.
    19 It ranks first among the works of God,
    yet its Maker can approach it with his sword.
    20 The hills bring it their produce,
    and all the wild animals play nearby.
    21 Under the lotus plants it lies,
    hidden among the reeds in the marsh.
    22 The lotuses conceal it in their shadow;
    the poplars by the stream surround it.
    23 A raging river does not alarm it;
    it is secure, though the Jordan should surge against its mouth.
    24 Can anyone capture it by the eyes,
    or trap it and pierce its nose?
    41 “Can you pull in Leviathan with a fishhook
    or tie down its tongue with a rope?
    2 Can you put a cord through its nose
    or pierce its jaw with a hook?
    3 Will it keep begging you for mercy?
    Will it speak to you with gentle words?
    4 Will it make an agreement with you
    for you to take it as your slave for life?
    5 Can you make a pet of it like a bird
    or put it on a leash for the young women in your house?
    6 Will traders barter for it?
    Will they divide it up among the merchants?
    7 Can you fill its hide with harpoons
    or its head with fishing spears?
    8 If you lay a hand on it,
    you will remember the struggle and never do it again!
    9 Any hope of subduing it is false;
    the mere sight of it is overpowering.
    10 No one is fierce enough to rouse it.
    Who then is able to stand against me?
    11 Who has a claim against me that I must pay?
    Everything under heaven belongs to me.
    12 “I will not fail to speak of Leviathan’s limbs,
    its strength and its graceful form.
    13 Who can strip off its outer coat?
    Who can penetrate its double coat of armor?
    14 Who dares open the doors of its mouth,
    ringed about with fearsome teeth?
    15 Its back has rows of shields
    tightly sealed together;
    16 each is so close to the next
    that no air can pass between.
    17 They are joined fast to one another;
    they cling together and cannot be parted.
    18 Its snorting throws out flashes of light;
    its eyes are like the rays of dawn.
    19 Flames stream from its mouth;
    sparks of fire shoot out.
    20 Smoke pours from its nostrils
    as from a boiling pot over burning reeds.
    21 Its breath sets coals ablaze,
    and flames dart from its mouth.
    22 Strength resides in its neck;
    dismay goes before it.
    23 The folds of its flesh are tightly joined;
    they are firm and immovable.
    24 Its chest is hard as rock,
    hard as a lower millstone.
    25 When it rises up, the mighty are terrified;
    they retreat before its thrashing.
    26 The sword that reaches it has no effect,
    nor does the spear or the dart or the javelin.
    27 Iron it treats like straw
    and bronze like rotten wood.
    28 Arrows do not make it flee;
    slingstones are like chaff to it.
    29 A club seems to it but a piece of straw;
    it laughs at the rattling of the lance.
    30 Its undersides are jagged potsherds,
    leaving a trail in the mud like a threshing sledge.
    31 It makes the depths churn like a boiling caldron
    and stirs up the sea like a pot of ointment.
    32 It leaves a glistening wake behind it;
    one would think the deep had white hair.
    33 Nothing on earth is its equal—
    a creature without fear.
    34 It looks down on all that are haughty;
    it is king over all that are proud.”
    — Book of Job 38-41
  • Philosophy of depression.

    Depression is nothing more than lack of self-esteem and identity. The depressed doesn't believe in themselves, they don't believe they have a destiny, they have no faith - nor do they work at creating it.


    This is Jacques Fresco. One of my personal heros. He just died about 10 days ago. At 101 years old. How did he make it to that age? Because he worked. And worked. And used his mind and body, and didn't let them go to waste.

    What causes depression? Expectations that you deserve X or Y to be given to you. Leftism and communism - which disempowers people and makes them rely on the State, or some outside agency for worldly salvation. Also overpowering people/parents who give the child the idea that they can't make it on their own. Also some of society's standards of conduct which make people feel guilty if they don't meet them. Buddhism is right on this point - you have to work out your own salvation (at least with regards to worldly, non-spiritual salvation).

    God gave you intelligence. Use it. It's not there to fust in you unused. So make use of it. Push yourself.

    Go for a run. Do that right now. Stop complaining and other shit. And when you feel you're wheezing, short of breath, wanna give up, can't handle this anymore, etc. etc. ignore the feeling and push yourself onwards. One more step. And another. And another. Depression is overcome when you stop letting it control your behaviour.

    Read this book: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psycho-Cybernetics

    Act on it.
  • Philosophy of depression.
    I know that a certain man was visiting her house when the husband and kids were at school (every Thursday), and they were having sex. Now, this guy looked like the type you see in porn shoots. Bald head, shaved legs, tall and muscular, wearing khaki shorts with black glasses (funnily enough similar to the type you see from police officers but I digress). — Question
  • Does your current job utilize your education?
    You're encouraging me to risk getting myself in trouble for reading a book or magazine in work-time?Sapientia
    Well, I don't think it's inappropriate at all. Just ask the manager or whoever is in charge if there's any work you can do - if he says that currently there's nothing, then go read. I've worked part-time in a store while in high school, at the counter. There were times when there was no one buying anything so I was reading. Nobody had any problem with it, cause there just wasn't anything else I could be doing for them.

    And no, I think that working hard for it's own sake is pretty dumb.Sapientia
    Not for its own sake, for the sake of making a good use of your time, and for the sake of results (which aren't necessarily monetary results).

    But that's because it's in my interest to do so for various reasons, like my chances of keeping my job, getting more contracted hours, or getting promoted. Ultimately, it's about the money.Sapientia
    It's a fine line with things like promotions, etc. If you make your employer feel he can do anything with you, and you'll always accept it, then you're not likely to get promoted or get raises. If on the other hand he feels you're such a valuable asset that his business will somehow suffer if you leave him and go somewhere else [and he sees the possibility of you leaving as real] - that he can't very easily find someone like you - then he'll be more likely to promote you or give you a raise.

    Money ultimately means nothing but perceived value. If you remember that, you can alter the money by altering your perceived value. As I said before, people with degrees for example have higher perceived values, even though, many of them, realistically, don't deserve it based on their knowledge and capabilities of actually delivering results.
  • Does your current job utilize your education?
    So, love is the cause, I guess. Or $740 million at first sight.Bitter Crank
    At that level, most marriages are strategic anyway, even if there was love involved. To be honest, there's a certain degree of rational understanding that's required too. For example, I wouldn't marry a woman even if I loved her if she wasn't someone who also had, or could develop, the traits required to build a strong family.

    But yeah, I have little reason to doubt that the Trump kids married purely out of financial interests.