naitche
-
Posts
404 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by naitche
-
-
5 minutes ago, dimreepr said:
I have...
More than once!
0 -
Objectively, Incomprehension is not refutation.
Its a singular, stand alone value.
One.
If its value is dependent or entangled with another, separate One, its not gonna stand on its own. It has no value as a stand alone focal object.
Objectively, You have the value of one, just like every body else. Your being One neither bestows or subtracts from any other One. In an objective statehood.
Thats objective equality.
You can just call me One.
0 -
On 10/23/2021 at 8:18 AM, beecee said:
comments? Is this, as the narrative suggests, the silver bullet to control climate change? I certainly hope all the delegates and leaders at the upcoming Glasgow climate change conference have this information on hand.
I don't know if its any kind of silver bullet, I do think it an important part of the puzzle.
The Nationals here in Aus. have agreed to net zero by 2050 after holding out this long. I'm sure Farmers For Climate Action has played a large part, supporting that change.
That information and more, like the feeding of seaweed to Ruminants, is being amassed by farmers eager to do their bit and contribute. The pressure applied to the Nationals from within is one result. Bottom up.
Weather delegates are able to process the information provided well enough to incentivize replication and further innovation, new direction in farming remains to be seen.
The top down solutions proposed by many seem to focus more on what should be discarded or made redundant, than recognition of that kind of response-ability and potential. What to sacrifice, not what can be modified locally, without the more intimate 'local' understanding of the bits discarded or any potential they may have had. .
The puzzle is too big and complex to be seen from a single perspective.
I hope the perspective generated by the conference understands that well enough to take direction from participants of the puzzle, rather than just promoting their redundancies.
1 -
14 hours ago, Peterkin said:
I wonder how many subjective meanings the word "objective" has.
Do you mean how many subjects you can find ?
There lies endless potential.
If the ability to respond is there.
0 -
9 hours ago, Peterkin said:
At least we know now what wants to live forever, even if flopping around the floor in little pieces: this thread.
And the entitlement to un-equal virtue.
0 -
1 hour ago, Ferrummageticium said:
im still curious on studies that involve the effects of reputation labels on sites and effects and ill post some data here , its not meant to be offensive ,but maybe we all can learn from it . since i dont know any or have never even looked into any studys , ill deeply go over the studies and post them objectively somewhere in psychology for viewing.
An interesting study. Would tie into positive and negative reward systems of training/learning cognition.
Blocking of unwanted behaviors coupled with reward would seem far more effective than 'punishment' or devaluation, much less likely to provoke resistance and ties in with studies showing that value (of behaviors, goods etc) must be demonstrated before recognition.
0 -
And no one left in a position where taking responsibility for that won't be blocked by very heavy resistance.
Direction is to function, not to form. Form follows, or looses further environmental direction in favor of maintaining state.
0 -
Equal to those who insist these Human conditions manifest in isolation, independent of the environment they are subject to, and attempt to subtract their way to an ideal state.
Look to Pedigree dogs to see where that leads. Nothing left to work with.
0 -
On 10/21/2021 at 3:40 AM, Peterkin said:
Why is it okay to indulge the whim of a superior, but not a peer or subordinate? It's quite commonly accepted to humour a child. What is so unthinkable about humouring an adult with a harmless delusion?
Because it is patronizing, and not done in recognition of an equal. Its a pretense to disguise inequality.
Acceptance of delusion. whether or not its harmless is subjective.
On 10/21/2021 at 3:40 AM, Peterkin said:Dr. Peterson's 'argument' [sounds like, from what I've heard of it] : I won't speak respectfully to people I despise [for reasons he delineates, but does not demonstrate as valid] and the law that tries me to force me to [It doesn't.] is wrong [It isn't.] His 'debate' with minority and only recently enfranchised people is: I refuse to engage with your issues, because I don't recognize your collective identity. IOW: I get to assign identity to others and reject their right to identify themselves.
You make assumptions not borne out by other perspectives, and it sounds like with out a genuine attempt at seeing for yourself, though I may be wrong.
I don't think his debate is with minorities or that he unwilling to address their issues, but that he recognizes the dangers of assuming an objective collective identity that justifies the marginalization of humanity. Because it does.
His argument is with the those people who believe you can assign us all to our relative boxes, and address the box instead of the content. While ignoring their spill and entanglement.
On 10/21/2021 at 4:02 AM, iNow said:Of course, and I don't believe anyone is suggesting we ought to go without counterargument. Sadly thus far, most "counterarguments" are limited to "stop whining" and "you're just being too sensitive." Those aren't counterarguments. They're disrespectful dismissals of valid reasonable requests.
'Racist' and 'Far Right' are also used in place of counter argument here as disrespectful dismissal.
On 10/21/2021 at 4:02 AM, iNow said:Right... and we should watch out for all 7 of those people (
)who have actual mental health issues while ALSO respecting the other 99.9% who simply asking for acceptance (not even acceptance, just an end to the dismissal, disparagement, and disrespect) for identifying as their authentic selves.
Bell curve applies to all conditions of humanity with overlap across the board. As such, Human conditions are descriptive, not definitive. Application of objective values to Human conditions is objective- of environment. Definitive, and a corruption of Human language. It can only subtract, or exclude from the description. Acceptance of an objective identity requires that it be defined, for recognition. To object to what does not belong.
Environment. Thats your 7(?!!) people who have actual mental health issues, as well as the free loaders, the outliers at either end of the bell curve and any other not strictly 'definitive' . It shrinks. Like the Demon summoned to materialize in a pentagram drawn on its navel.
These Human conditions are Subject of environment
On 10/21/2021 at 1:51 PM, Arete said:So, imagine I'm a professor teaching a class. I refer to students by their preferred first names. Plenty of people go by things different from what's on their birth certificates. Some are kind of odd, but generally I do my best to pronounce people's names the way they ask, and not mix up people's names. I make the odd mistake, but generally that's how it goes. Except for the African American kid. I call him "boy" because that's what we call black folks where I'm from. He repeatedly tells me his name is Paul, but I insist on calling him "boy" whilst using everyone else in the classes preferred name.
Paul complains to the University office for the Prevention of Discrimination and Harrassment, who determine that I have violated both institutional policy and federal employment laws by discriminating based on race. I have to face a disciplinary hearing and might get fired.
Now replace "name" with "pronoun" and "African American" with "transgender". Explain why it wouldn't be discrimination based on gender identity.It is.
The arguments are not mutually exclusive, though you read them that way.
Most times your chosen pronouns should be respected as a courtesy in common. No disagreement.
But no virtue I can think of should demand I express a reality other than the one my own reasoning shows me.
On 10/22/2021 at 12:44 AM, Peterkin said:So does the professor on the podium. Jordan Peterson has been forcefully and very publicly making the point that he shouldn't be required to respect the stated identity of anyone he considers unworthy.
No. J.P. has been standing his ground and refusing to concede. He is not 'forcing' anyone. He is resisting being forced.
On 10/22/2021 at 12:44 AM, Peterkin said:When someone has noticeably different different pigmentation, their racial identity is not questioned -
Uncle Tom? Far Right activist? My reality says otherwise. Racists wet dream? I've defended IRL, too many times, black public figures from these slurs aimed and un-challenged by people claiming to be on the virtuous side.
Two black opinions expressed.
The 1st arguing for reparations and reckoning of todays humanity for suffering inflicted.
The 2nd arguing for help where its needed today, to address the ongoing effects. Like drug dependence, Poverty, affordable housing, education and health access. Issues that stand in the way of equals to participation.
Both valid perspectives. Nothing in one should exclude the other.
But almost always, someone who recognizes their own white privilege then uses it to discredit the 2nd with those labels.
Both are black. Both are equally representative of black perspective.. I was told the 2nd was not. Its inclusion 'cherry picking' because the author was clearly advocating a Right wing agenda.
Thats your white privilege in action, choosing the representatives of the minorities you choose to recognize.
Pretty extreme and not an isolated incident by any stretch.
This is how your 'outliers' increase, not decrease.
On 10/22/2021 at 12:44 AM, Peterkin said:Who are these extreme activists? What, specifically, have they done and to whom?
Part of your answer above.
On 10/22/2021 at 1:44 AM, Arete said:I disagree - that's the EXACT point of Peterson's argument. He doesn't believe in transgenderism (despite the extensive scientific basis of it), and is claiming that being asked to use a student's preferred pronouns is a violation of his free speech rights. His subtle, intentional discrimination is that he would be happy to use the preferred pronouns of cis-gender appearing students, but not those whose physical appearance does not conform to his assumptions of gender presentation, because of his personal (and IMO fundamentally wrong) opinion that their identity is not valid.
We're going in circles, but he's arguing that it is his right to discriminate against people who do not conform to gender norms. I'm pointing out that it's not for other protected classes, and asking why transgender people shouldn't be afforded the same protections as religion, race, sexual orientation, etc.No. J.P is arguing Transgenderism doesn't exist Objectively. Its subjective. Backed by science.
The same protections should be afforded equally.
On 10/22/2021 at 7:05 AM, Arete said:- which means you can't single them out and treat them differently.
2 -
1 hour ago, beecee said:
I certainly hope all the delegates and leaders at the upcoming Glasgow climate change conference have this information on hand.
So do I.
It has made a huge difference to my little piece of earth that was once classed as 'Dryland' and and what I feel is a great example of bottom up action, doing what you can where you are-tackling the issues you see in front of you from that more intimate understanding.
Big tech/corporations have a lot to answer for in modern farming practices and agriculture education- and no doubt too many other areas. I have little faith in top down solutions that view agriculture from a monolithic/objective perspective.
Australian Farmers for climate action are ensuring the information has been made available. If its kept to hand we will have to see.
0 -
4 hours ago, beecee said:
An observation: Through movies, world news etc, it does appear to me that Australians are far less "formal" then Americans. It is hardly ever heard of addressing our PM as Sir, mostly he would be addressed by his nickname ScoMo [for Scott Morrison] or as Scott. I doubt any Australain PM would demand to be addressed as Sir!
As a child migrant to Australia I was reprimanded by my class mates for addressing my teacher as 'Sir'. I explained it was the norm where I came from. I was told you never address a person with a title of respect that is un earned or excessive to their relative position.
As to diversity, I found Australians in general very accepting, but part of that expression included drawing attention to your difference, maybe with a descriptive nick name(though not in the case of more intimate difference)
eg. He may be a block head but hes ours.
I believe the argument here and and in general is not weather we improve conditions for minorities or not,
But if that is best achieved by providing
Direction ie. be mindful that the world offers us all a unique perspective and try to understand and accept those as equal products of our human environment.
Provide a 'better' perspective where one is imposing on others. A biological definition of response ability.
Or imposing a perspective or statehood that reduces environment to that state, so avoids that responsibility.
Objective Vs subjective values. Objective is subtractive, of environment.
0 -
On 10/16/2021 at 4:27 AM, Implications said:
Hello. I have come to heavily doubt my Efilist and promortalist stance.
Is anybody here an ex-efilist, an ex-animal-antinatalist or ex-promortalist?
How did you get into it, how did you leave?
This is a call for help, I feel trapped by this philosophy. I need to know if there are others like me.
EDIT:
I am mainly looking for people who have held these stances and have now changed. But I suppose I might as well let others join in.
Efil is life spelled backwards. It represents a stance of "anti-life". Efilists are universal antinatalists ,which means they want to sterilise the planet, and are generally promortalists.
Promortalists attaches a negative value to life, it is a philosophical stance is that it is better for you to cease to exist than continue to be.
Explore other philosophies.
These ones could just as accurately be described anti-free will. The ability to decide measurement of being, or values.
Value is always subjective.
This objective application is based on belief, not philosophy.
By applying subjective value beyond the margins of the subject.
0 -
I would say accomplishment is reward for those.
0 -
9 hours ago, zapatos said:
IMO the responsibility to address the carbon footprint and recycle has been laid in the wrong place; with consumers.
Very little plastic gets recycled, and when it does it is 'down-cycled'. To make real change we need the manufacturers of plastics to take responsibility.
We can drive fewer miles but we still have to drive the cars that were manufactured. We need the manufacturers to make more efficient vehicles.
I think its the responsibility of us all. Not a fault of the environment we live in. It is what it is because thats what we continue to collectively support. Economic Growth and excessively wasteful consumption .
9 hours ago, zapatos said:This is not to say that people can't do their part, but if you really want to have an impact, stop looking at what you can recycle/reuse/reduce and put your effort into influencing governments and corporations.
So stop looking at personal waste and inefficiency. Demand your environment no longer support it ?
That either ignores or has little understanding of biological law.
We do need manufactories to change the way/goods they produce, but thats going to be too slow while we collectively make it more profitable to continue as is.
0 -
The site is not allowing me to quote for some reason.
On the O.P, I think its less a dialogue between Conservative Vs Liberalism than objective Vs Subjective values, which we tend to apply arbitrarily (dependent on the subject) and not confined to either a liberal or conservative mindset but more closely to the bell curve model.
For this reason I think its presumptuous to assume political affiliation based on how those values are applied to specific subjects. ie If he doesn't agree we are on the right path he must be other than we. Objective to we.
On the subject of Hierarchies being natural, It seems they are essential to selection and evolution, if there is to be selection. Otherwise what are we selecting from or for?
A universal state of being, or universal direction?
1 hour ago, TheVat said:I fall back on the great Dr. Asimov: "Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent."
I.M.O Competence is what J.P is arguing most strenuously for, to avoid conflict.
Most here seem to have lead lives of 'privilege' where real bodily threat has not been a common issue.
Where you realize you are about to be hurt, is it going to be fight, flight or surrender?
Competence to make the choice and live with the result. In my experience when flight is not an option, even the illusion of competence can be what diffuses the situation to avoid violence if you can make clear you can stand, without surrender.
I may not agree with all J.P has to say, that doesn't mean I think he he has nothing of value to contribute or that its value is lessened because I don't objectively share a box with him.
2 -
17 hours ago, Doogles31731 said:
TheVat, thanks for that interesting reference about seaweed and gas emissions in cattle. It could have some effect, but in places like Australia, most of our cattle fatten on natural grass pastures under extensive range conditions. But let’s not get into emissions just yet.
Australian Farmers have also created a coalition of Farmers for Climate action.
C.S.I.R.O has conducted their own tests on Seaweed meal and its not unusual for even grass fed cattle to get mineral and seaweed mix.
Grazing animals and even hooved animals are an essential part maintaining healthy biologically diverse grasslands and soil biomass.
Monoculture croplands are every bit as damaging to that as poor grazing practice.
0 -
12 hours ago, WendyDarling said:
No.
Recognition requires intelligence to create what is recognized
To create data then?
Or to assign values to that data/take its measure. Value = being
0 -
One.
Recognition.
A single unit of value. Minimum requirement for measure of a thing/existence/being.
Subject of recognition. ie does any value exist with out registration/recognition.
0 -
1 hour ago, Intoscience said:
It's very relevant, historically how the segregation came about is irrelevant, but the fact that the segregation works well and gives woman an equal and fair opportunity to compete and gain equal status to men is very relevant. No one is arguing that transgender competitors should be discluded, the argument is whether if they are categorised into the current system does this have an adverse effect on this system in a way that it makes it unfair to other competitors.
I'm no expert, but it seems alarmingly clear to me that in certain sports, especially contact combat sports, there may be a concern not only for fairness but maybe safety?
I have a friend who's son is a transgender woman. Yesterday, I plucked up the courage to ask a few questions on the subject without sounding offensive. I asked about combat, she told me that she would never strike another woman in fear of doing some serious damage but had no problem striking a man if it was ever required. She told me that she still retains her physical strength regardless of her surgery and hormone treatment.
Her stance was that transgender women should not be allowed to compete certain sports against cis-gender, however she was very clear on discrimination and identity. So she acknowledged that fairness could be a problem and felt torn between the arguments. (in fairness she openly admitted that she was not very "sporty" so could be talking out of her ass)
Interesting hearing this from the horses mouth so to speak. It seems, at least in her case that the world needs to accept sexual identity and equality for all, but also appreciates the difficulty in certain scenarios where segregation can lead to discrimination.
Very open conversations with my niece and an old friend who who have expressed similar sentiments, happy to say they are Trans Women, not simply Women. They embrace a difference. Its just being who they feel comfortable being.
A small sample. No doubt there will be others equally qualified who say the opposite.
I won't claim to be better qualified than either.
0 -
I agree an equal platform in sports should be available to Trans Men and Women as to those held by men and women.
If the stake holders agree those divisions are sufficient, there is no place for me to be concerned otherwise.
Some sports though have been segregated specifically to ensure Women do have an equal platform.
If stake holders are saying those division are not sufficient to maintain equal platforms, its not my place to dismiss their concerns either.
1 -
I disagree.
Discussion of equality here would require an understanding of the principles that support its structure.
The difference between diversity and division for example. Its assumption or rejection.
0 -
C.T demands the Human environment once again accept a two structured system, in order to make amends.
The problem as I see it is the labelling of the 2 structures is going to inform expectation. Low expectations from the oppressors of the oppressed. While there will be little reason to trust or value those who openly accept they are oppressors.
Both parties are expected to accept the truth of those structures. Those who refuse seem to be the new oppressed.
There is no recognition of their humanity, and we are refusing access to Human structures. A place to stand.
No platform. So we have a 3 way split system with roughly 1/2 the population supporting a renewed two structured system, in opposition to the other half. Neither of which recognize the value of the other.
Equal and opposite reactions. I think Trump was a symptom, not the cause of the polarization. People who feel they were being pushed out, attempting to reclaim their space.
There is not much equalibrium in any of that for the whole of subjective Humanity. No common direction.
0 -
On 7/21/2021 at 11:47 AM, naitche said:
attempting objective measures of Human conditions is not possible with out exclusion.
That Critical Theory in practice is not anti racism or anti bigotry at all, just more of the same with a vengeance. More dangerous for its lack of focus. It discredits all of Humanity. There will be loss. Without focus, that doesn't allow you see whats being excluded.
It scares hell out of me. I have observed the same thing in The pedigree Dog Registries and its subtly devastating to the subject. Applying negative values and expecting a positive out come.
13 hours ago, TheVat said:Help us out here. Are you comparing the experience of a student learning the history of slavery, race massacres, Jim Crow oppression, etc. to the subtle despair dogs feel when...what? Ok, I just have no idea what this is about. Woof.
The comparison was meant to highlight the effects of ignoring logic in the formation of social /human constructs. No where near enough context I agree. 😅 Woof
The Subject (our Humanity) must be divided before there can even be oppressor and oppressed. We worked hard to finally dismantle a double system structure. I'm sure its the application of objective value to what should be subjective that does that.A subject is the sum of its parts. If they are equal to its purpose and direction, there is no objective measure of its parts that won't divide, and reduce the sum by its measure.
Diversity is the antithesis of equality.
It looks like that objective value bias is the structure of racism or bigotry, as ordered by our common language, but is also responsible for much more complex biological behavior than that, Affecting selection processes, expectation, responsibility from bottom to top of all biological structure.
Still not close enough to express what I'm seeing effectively, though I'm convinced it is relevant. Your request I try @TheVathas brought me a lot closer.
In the meantime, I've no one and no where else to practice. The patience of a few is appreciated. Sorry guys if you don't share it..
0 -
24 minutes ago, MigL said:
Would you consider that, the development of imagination ?
Or maybe a lower expectation?
0
Natural Selection, Unnatural Selection, and the Nature of Consciousness
in Speculations
Posted
Consciousness and Evolution and behavior interest me.
I believe yes, its a continuum. The same laws repeated along the whole of the chain.
I see consciousness as the measurement of ones being.
So the measure of the being is heavily influenced by available environment. The usual environment would be unfamiliar, unknown and un-recognizable to such an individual who would be unable to respond effectively or contribute to its value.
The person or organism (whatever One object you are seeing) would be missing the foundations required for optimal use and response.
i don't think the software is inadequate, just under utilized in our understanding and application. We are not as familiar with it yet as as we might be, to recognize the full potentials, and response-abilities conferred. They are the working foundations of our biology.
We don't operate with out them.
I.Q is said to increase with each generation. I believe a search of I.Q enhancement should bring results.
There is so much more though, packed into that proposal than could be adequately addressed by such a study.