Damn. I was very wrong. :zip:Wishful thinking?TBD. — 180 Proof
:wink: Follow me down these rabbit holes to Wonderland, my friend ..I really wonder on what people base their predictions ... — Tobias
:up: :up:[M]any of us, most of us, don't see the world and relationships this way. This is your personal, idiosyncratic reaction to your own personal idiosyncratic problems and your solution is your personal, idiosyncratic solution. Doctoring it up with Schopenhauer doesn't change that. — T Clark
In America on the ballot today there is a simple, yet fateful question: FOR TYRANNY (Trump-Vance) OR AGAINST TYRANNY (Harris-Walz)?A republic, if you can keep it. — Benjamin Franklin, 17 September 1787
:100:[ ... ] I have no problem understanding why people follow Trump, regardless of his behavior. People are more stupid than they think and it demands effort to always be vigil of your own biases. These people have no such abilities and thus are open to a total annihilation of their inner agency, making them into zealots and drones. — Christoffer
Only that it is possible either to be or not to be 'existentially self-aware' ...Does having the capacity for existential self-awareness imply anything further than this fact? — schopenhauer1
I suppose that such a species would value immortality-projects (i.e. fetishes / technologies) higher than any other – probably as the basis of all other – values.That is to say, does a species of animal(s) that has the ability to conceptually "know" that it exists, entail anything further, in any axiological way?
Consider this recent article on how easily "betting markets" are manipulated ...
https://insights.som.yale.edu/insights/dont-trust-the-political-prediction-markets — 180 Proof
:mask:My father always said, 'The Zionists love Israel and hate Jews.' — Esther Farmer, A Land With a People: Palestinians and Jews Confront Zionism
:smirk:There would only be a freakout if your prediction of Harris winning the popular voteby nine points or soand ablue tsunami carrying her to a landslide[blowout] victory is correct. That's not going to happen though. — Baden
I think (your) "Evolutionary Coping Mechanism" overstates the case with an underdeveloped "theory". Consider the following old threads:Why Religion Exists ... — ContextThinker
(2022) Roots of religion ...Magical thinking. 'Making shit up' is far easier than struggling to find out what is and is not the case. The brains of h. sapiens are adapted for survival and not truths; therefore [ ... ] — 180 Proof
We're natural beings. Paths of least resistance constitute the regularities – processes – of nature. Making shit up (versus figuring shit out) is a path of least cognitive resistance [ ... ] — 180 Proof
Well I can't wait for the cognitive dissonance freakout here on this thread when Harris-Walz wins (possibly declared as soon as next Wednesday night). :wink:The cognitive dissonance is going to be so extreme whenTrump wins. Even for the government itself. — Shawn
:rofl:Trump is up 65% to 35% in the betting markets (which have a solid track record) and ahead in swing state polling. If he outperforms his polling like he did in the last elections he will win all the swing states and it's even conceivable he could win the popular vote (hell, it's within the margin of error for some polls). — Count Timothy von Icarus
:up: :up:Why don't they kill themselves? They're telling us death is nothing to be afraid of and benefits us hugely....yet they seem reluctant to die. Actions speak louder than words. — Clearbury
Although I believe in life after death, I think NDEs are not good evidence for it. They seem better explained as dreams. — Clearbury
:up: :up:When I am unconscious I am not non-existent. I exist, but I am just not conscious. So 'consciousness' and 'a person' are not equivalent. My quibble, then, is that it is persons or minds (I use the terms interchangeably) who survive death, not 'consciousness' (consiousness is something persons have, but it is not what a person 'is').
:roll: In other words, there was no "NDE" just a non-ordinary experience of a living person that is misattributed by her and then on rare occasions circumstantially corroborated by other living persons (e.g. like sober witnesses to a black-out drunk's shenanigans). Of course, forensically, eyewitness testimony² like introspection¹ is usually unreliable as evidence.The main difference is that they can be corroborated by others who were there. — Sam26
:up: :up:I'd expect that the situation would be more likely than ever to search for simple solutions to the complex problems. — Relativist
Contemporary man has begun to lose his naiveté as ... the deep causes of the situation in which he finds himself are becoming clearer. He realizes that to attack these deep causes is the indispensable prerequisite for radical change. And so he has gradually abandoned a simple reformist attitude regarding the existing social order, for, by its very shallowness this reformism perpetuates the existing system.
*
It has become ever clearer that underdevelopment is the end result of a process. Therefore, it must be studied from a historical perspective, that is, in relationship to the development and expansion of the great capitalist countries. The underdevelopment of the poor countries, as an overall social fact, appears in its true light: as the historical by-product of the development of other countries. The dynamics of the capitalist economy lead to the establishment of a center and a periphery, simultaneously generating progress and growing wealth for the few and social imbalances, political tensions, and poverty for the many. — Fr. Gustavo Gutiérrez, founder of liberation theology, d. 2024
You've not been paying attention, bro. I know: 2017*, 2018, 2020, 2022, 2023* ... :victory: :mask:Abortion and democracymay be whatmotivates people to get out and vote— but you don’t really know that, nor do I. — Mikie
Not crazy, just cynically mistaken. The 2024 US election is about (1) whether or not this should be the last US election and (2) whether or not women in the US should have the inallienable right of bodily autonomy (i.e. unrestricted access to reproductive healthcare); this election is not principally about mere policy preferences (re: taxes, immigration, foreign policy, military spending, climate change, etc). As a Bernie Bro since the '90s, I ask you, Mikie: Why else would both Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez & Liz Cheney, both Bernie Sanders & Dick Cheney endorse Harris-Walz?Guess I’m not so crazy after all :rofl: — Mikie