My question is how can a person say they are neither male nor female? Surely there is a very great range of ways of being and behavior as either gender so it is as if gender itself offends some people. Putting aside that sex is defined before birth, simply eliminating the word doesn't alter ones potential in any arena.

Wikipedia was my reference. What figure and from where would you say is more accurate?

As opposed to being called "colored" versus not?

Perhaps an abbreviation refering specifically to the racial groups that are being referred to?

Like how LGBTQ lumps a few groups under the same umbrella?

I don't mean famous well known philosophers. Just overall gender disparity among professional philosophers.

I don't specifically mean feminist female philosophers. Just in general. Would it be said there are maybe 20% or less of all philosophers are female?

I am really asking just how significant the results of any experiment need to be above chance before it is meaningful?

Well parapsychology I meant to mean the study of individual abilities beyond the obvious 5 sense while miracles are unexpected and unlikely events that happen without individual help per se. And more than that if it is unanticipated one can't prepare an experiment beforehand to measure it.

I realize that one will outlive the other, but what is romance in a life without limits? When we ourselves are the cosmic forces we once compared ourselves to in the heat of passion?

I would say half the females I work with help me through the day just by being present even though I don't necessarily fancy them in a romantic way. They just have unique but genuine qualities that I would take great offense if anyone ever changed them.

Sounds about right. Nothing is ideal after 25.

Perhaps. But these big questions interest me. If I could be sure we exist after death and things actually improve than I wouldn't concern myself as much with new medical research. In particular gene therapy to force my retina to regenerate, a skill we mammals generally lack. It has so many implications for even young people with horrible diseases and disorders to live a normal life.

For context I am 40 now and after 35 started getting regular headaches and a retina disease. I jog half the days of the week and used to go to the gym regularly before Covid-19. I am maybe 3lbs overweight, some weeks normal. My energy and concentration are poor. And sleep quality as I said is poor after 25. Particularly after 30.

The antiaging research that interests me is NAD+, cellular senescence, stem cells, gene therapy, blood plasma proteins, and fasting.

I guess I am asking if it is selfish because the world may already be over populated and the resources are limited and I don't know if I have as much right to them as those that are young for the first time.

I am assuming money isn't changing hands, and ego isn't being rubbed.

So religions feel secularism is taking from their authority over people? I know from chapter 4 of "Bowling alone" it discusses how churches primarily handle charities that which deal in poverty, hunger, etc. Would a person of a more religious orientation versus say simply "spiritual" say the secular people who aren't devoted to religion are less caring or else these issues wouldn't require the churches attention?

Already sent it to one. Didn't get much back.

I have read that many people claiming to be psychic/mediums have shown to have a non-pathological degree of DID or maybe even some schizophrenia. I wasn't sure if this indicates that they are imagining things not deliberately, or if the mind requires certain extra flexibility in the off chance that they do in fact have real abilities.

I mean having no sense of self and no perception of a world around oneself.

I say creativity must have an emotional aspect because when we try to think logically and feel mental exhaustion from using same conformed parts of brain all the time we react to the pain of fatigue and simply use the next available part of brain, like exercise requires we sometimes use under utilized leg muscles when a breaking point is met. It may not be grand inspiration, but a product of limited resources?

What initiates a creative thought or stream of thinking? It is my understanding that creativity decreases with age so I assume it is an emotional function that depletes when neurotransmitter levels decline?

Afterlife might just be dogma, but many are convinced we go on. I am 40 and have already forgot most of my 20s but am sure it was better. I certainly didn't think as much about death then. But that aside if we die and lose all memory because it only existed in our brain run on the simple premise of generating dopamine than it was a very shallow and empty existence, that clearly on its own has no point other than self gratification. Death isn't pessimistic if it isn't the end. How can it be? Particularly if it were eternal and without concern of our bodies holding up.

So optimism must be broad and non descript? Is that the take away?

Lol.

Now this goes off into a different area, but a psychic medium told me that it is only possible to reach spiritual beings when using the creative mind. Say what you will about people claiming to be psychic, but can one find knowledge with the creative mind like presumably the eyes use a more objective mind to determine universally that an object is round and green versus other? Or can the creative mind only invent shit as I imagine could well be the case with a psychic whether or not they realize it?

Can we say for sure that anything exists that doesn't serve some purpose?

When designing an experiment in science I assume we might use creativity to find new ways to get to the facts. Otherwise we might be limited to very direct methods which might be a brick wall?

But then because it's science the data must be measured objectively and not creativity?

Is there a time when knowledge itself can't be reached without using the creative mind even if the information isn't invented?

Do we need iphones to survive?

My interest in the afterlife is not driven by betterment so much as breaking even. In this physical life our health declines. I certainly never had headaches before 30 and now at 40 I have headaches daily and my back hurts constantly. Functionality is just so difficult most days. I want to believe A, it was all for a purpose, and B, that something comes next making the sufferings of life end, and hopefully something functional begins.

I don't see how optimism about the afterlife could be pessimistic because there is no precedent of disappointment since we presumably only die once.

So it isn't optimistic to consider the only 2 possibilities that one can fathom and finding something positive about either? There must be only one positive outcome one believes in?

I don't know how to define optimistic thinking. Is it mostly gray area and optimistic and pessimistic thinking are pretty absolute in their requirements?

And for the record I don't drink at all. lol.

Assuming what I said were the only possible outcomes is it optimistic the way I stated it?

What could prompt the development of new cities? Surely every city has a breaking point where it is too costly to live there, and there isn't enough space? I have seen footage of some Chinese cities and I can't imagine a more crowded way to live.

In the future won't more rural areas inevitably become more densely packed and require more efficient infrastructures?

What if someone provided a link to research from a very good research university that followed very rigorous protocols? Can their evidence be given powerful consideration even if we ourselves aren't able to review everything that has been done personally? They say they saw the higgs boson. Not sure I can doubt them. Lol.

I recognize that the US is a republic. But as far as any labels including conservative or liberal which can be given a negative connotation are concerned. Candidates never detail things until if and after they are elected. Only after can we even begin to measure where on a spectrum they are, and have accountability for promises made. If they say nearly nothing than they might as well be a robot.

immoral how? It isn't honesty?

Interesting.

I think a soul contract is a list of things we hope to add to our existence in each new incarnation, but of course we don't remember prior lives and therefore must rely on intuition of what we hoped to accomplish. Some say the pull of our contract may adversely affect our lives in some cases.