Otto Kretschmer

Care to elaborate? So far - you shall feel the honour of being downvoted.

I do know that faith and reason are technically separate - but since the number of possible religions is infinite and none of them can be proven empirically, why not subscribe to all possible religions at once? Like, just build a shrine with the infinity (♾️) symbol or whatnot and pray to it.

The tv series The Expanse was based on a series of books, it is actually a good hard sci fi.

How would you describe yourselves? I myself have experienced quite a significant poltiical evolution from being a Libertarian at age 18-21, then a Social Democrat and then a non demonational Marxist this year (age 31-31) although I am tolerant of other left wing movements as well as Christian Democrats. Mostly socially progressive as well, ambivalent about gun rights (gun ownership rate is negligible here in Poland and there isn't much debate about it). My political evolution towards the left started with a gradual realization that free market cannot solve everything roughly at age 21.

An Axiomatic Framework for the Domestic Feline SystemLet the universe of discourse be denoted by U. We define a cat, c, as an element of the set C, such that C is a proper subset of the set of Felidae (F), which is in turn a proper subset of Mammalia (M). c ∈ C ⊂ F ⊂ M ⊂ U The entity c is fully described by its state-space, morphology, behavioral functions, and governing quantum-metaphysical principles. 1. Axioms of Morphology and StateAxiom 1.1 (Corporeal Uniqueness): For any c, there exists a unique physical body, B, associated with it. ∀c ∈ C, ∃! B Axiom 1.2 (Standard Configuration): The body B is a topological manifold characterized by the following properties, subject to a standard deviation ε: Limbs (L): The cardinality of the set of locomotive appendages is |L(B)| = 4 ± ε. Caudal Appendage (T): There exists a flexible, uni-dimensional appendage T, such that Length(T) > 0. (Note: A null set, T = ∅, is a permissible, albeit recessive, variant). Surface Manifold (S): The surface S(B) is covered by a dense vector field of keratin filaments (f). The density function ρ(f) over S is greater than a specified baseline ρ_min, defining the property IsFurry(B). Retractable Claws (K): B is equipped with a set of claws K, where the state of each element k ∈ K can be described by a binary function: State(k, t) ∈ {Retracted, Extended}. Axiom 1.3 (State Function): The state of c at any time t is given by the function S(t), which maps to a discrete set of primary states: S(t) ∈ {Sleeping, Hunting, Grooming, Demanding_Sustenance, Observing, State_of_Chaos} The probability distribution over these states is heavily skewed: P(S(t) = Sleeping) ≈ 0.65 P(S(t) = State_of_Chaos) can be modeled as a series of Dirac delta functions, δ(t - t₀), where t₀ frequently corresponds to 3:00 AM local time. 2. Behavioral Functions and PostulatesFunction 2.1 (Vocalization Operator, V): The cat c possesses a vocalization operator V that maps a set of input stimuli Σ to a set of acoustic outputs Ω. V: Σ → Ω where Ω = {Purr(ω, A), Meow(f, I), Hiss, Chirp, ∅}. Purr(ω, A) is a low-frequency oscillation (ω ≈ 25 Hz) of variable amplitude A, which paradoxically can signify either contentment or distress. Meow(f, I) is a function of frequency f and intensity I, typically used to signal a non-zero value for the Demand_Sustenance state. Postulate 2.2 (The Principle of Minimal Action): The cat c will, for any given objective, follow a path that minimizes action, where "action" is defined as caloric expenditure. This naturally leads to the high probability of the Sleeping state (see Axiom 1.3). This is suspended only during State_of_Chaos. Postulate 2.3 (The Observer Path Intersection Theorem): Let an Observer O move with a velocity vector V_O. The cat c will, with high probability, adjust its position vector P_c such that its projected path P_c(t + Δt) intersects P_O(t + Δt), maximizing the potential for the Observer to trip. Function 2.4 (Topological Deformation, Φ): A cat's body B is subject to a transformation Φ that allows it to occupy a container V_cont where the perceived volume of the cat Volume(B) appears to be greater than the volume of the container Volume(V_cont). Φ: B → V_cont such that B' ⊂ V_cont. This demonstrates that a cat can behave as a non-Newtonian fluid, filling the shape of its container. 3. Quantum and Metaphysical PrinciplesPrinciple 3.1 (The Schrödinger Operator of Intent, Ĥ_door): The state of a cat relative to a closed door is a quantum superposition. The cat's wavefunction |ψ⟩ is a linear combination of two eigenstates: |Wants_In⟩ and |Wants_Out⟩. |ψ⟩ = α|Wants_In⟩ + β|Wants_Out⟩, where |α|² + |β|² = 1. The act of an Observer opening the door constitutes a measurement, which collapses the wavefunction to one of the two states. An immediate subsequent measurement will show that the system has evolved into the orthogonal state with near-certainty. Principle 3.2 (The Multi-Life Hypothesis): The existence of c is not a scalar but a vector L in a 9-dimensional Hilbert space of "lives". L = (l₁, l₂, ..., l₉) A catastrophic event E acts as an operator that transitions the system from state l_i to l_{i+1}. The system is considered terminated only when an operator E is applied to the state l₉. ConclusionA cat c is a semi-autonomous, topologically deformable, quadrupedal entity governed by the principle of minimal action. Its behavior is a probabilistic function of its internal state, and its physical location relative to observers and barriers is subject to principles of quantum mechanics. It operates as a closed system for the majority of a 24-hour period, becoming an open system primarily to emit or receive matter and entropy (food, affection, chaos).

The "not even all of us" part of my previous post adresses this issue. 😄

Other animals do show a form of proto-morality or pre-morality, elephants are a good example of this but only H. sapiens has a fully developed moral compass and not even all of us. Hindus and Buddhists believe that morality is literally woven into the very fabric of the universe and that one's morality (karma) directly determines their rebirth (samsara) or lack of thereof (for those who have achieved Moksha or Nirvana*) - and this claim of theirs is far from being a proven fact. I agree that my previous statement about morality being unrelated to causality wasn't precise enough - they are interconnected but not as strongly as Hindus and Buddhist think. *Not the band.

Morality itself is an extremely recent invention - humans are the only organisms on Earth capable of it and we've only been around for 300,000 years while life on Earth is 3.4 bln years old at least. How would karma and samsara work for E. coli? Or Vibrio cholerae?

The consequences come from other people, not the laws of physics. If you argue otherwise and got good arguments to support your claims, you are in a position to cause a revolution in science more profound than the ones of Newton and Einstein. 😂

Hindus and Buddhists treat Karma and Samsara as if they were facts, like gravity, while in practice the evidence for their existence is... vastly less clear. Causality does feature prominently in physics but it has nothing to do with morality. Also add that what is considered moral varies quite significantly with place and time. For example, in Ancient Rome, killing a slave for trying to run away would be a perfectly moral thing to do. Subjecting the killer to negative karma would mean punishing them for breaking moral rules they were not even taught to follow - an act far brom being just.

The OT is not wrong for Christians, analogous to how old versions of the Polish Criminal Code are not wrong but simply no longer in force. The Old Testament was superseded by the New Testament and a lot of OT laws were abolished but for Christians knowledge of the Old Testament is still essential for understanding why Jesus came.

This specific way of reacting to feelings of humiliation clearly exists in the population, it wasn't swept out by either natural or sexual selection. The second one is particularly odd since a relationship with a narcissist is literally a nightmare.

Change your tone. I simply used the first word that came to my mind, I have no will to spend half an hour on perfecting the OP so it sounds properly. I have other, more pleasant things to do.

It's existence makes no sense to me. Narcissitm is a reaction to having a fragile, insecure ego full of shame, the organism reacts by building a grandiose false ego that then tries to bury the fragile true one as deep as possible. But why precisely does such a bizarre process take place? Why invent such a messy, flawed psychological solution when simply dialing up the activity in the Prefrontal Cortex (to dampen the overactive amygdala) would be enough? The individual in question would end up being much more resilient and at the same time dramatically less toxic to other people in their environment.

Yes, I am a materialist, although I consider most religious beliefs harmless at least. When it comes to promoting scientific thinking, a certain British gentleman is both much more motivated and much more skilled at this than I am. 😀

Recently I debated Buddhists and Hindus about certain metaphysical beliefs of theirs. I have great respect for both religions and their self-cultivation methods, I just disagree with the supernatural stuff. Their key argument was that my skepticism is meaningless because science was wrong before and when the germ theory was created, scientists initially rejected it (which is largely true). How would you guys counter it? Those two discussiosn were the first time I've debated religionists for over a decade.

@TheVat Farewell. @Phi for All or @swansont this thread should be closed.

Regarding the OP: ... Nothing. A truly omniscient God would possess the knowledge of all possible universes, including ones he did not create and ones he has no power over. Regardless of how many universes he converts to his faith, there is always going to be infinite number of universes populated by entities that don't worship him.

This statement is true but ultimately quite meaningless - medicine is flawed too, yet if you had pneumonia, you would very much prefer it to be treated by modern antibiotics than by bloodletting. Yes, people are flawed but some are vastly more flawed than others. The core fact stands - I am not willing to put any work into my personality improvement. Not even a nanosecond. I don't want to put any amount of effortful work. And I don't want to want. What I want is completely effortless self-reincarnation with memories of my old self being kept as abstract data with no emotional weight.

To elaborate - I'd like to live in a world in which people would read about SSRIs and say: "Did people really try to cure themselves with this!? Did they really think that increasing serotonin level all across the brain in order to cure some vague, unspecific "depression" is going to work? It's so bizarre, it's like trying to charge an EV by throwing lightning strikes at it, just ridiculous!" I'd love to use technology to transform myself into a functionally different person - no more similar to my old self than a genetically unrelated individual. And I'd like to look at my old self with zero emotional baggage, no more sad or ashamed than a typical person is about the fact they once didn't have a driver's licence. This is a degree of change no drug or therapist of 2025 AD can offer to me and I cannot ofer it to myself either.

Right - But @Phi for All's analogy makes sense from the point of view of current psychiatry. By 2040-45 current methods will likely be as obsolete as [rescribing "fresh air" for tuberculosis is today. It's this future psychiatry that I'd like to use.

@TheVat @Phi for All I would try the currently available methods (psychotherapy, mindfulness etc.) but I am not sure of the results, the structural and functional abnormalities in my brain might be too severe for the currently available methods to be effective, I might as well put a lot of work for essentially nothing. If effective (proven) neuromodulation techniques were available, I would need just enough willpower to sit down and have a beam blasted at my skull.

I never choose my personality, hence I am under no obligation to work on improving it. The method of change has to: Work. Not require any effort on my part (people who need a heart surgery don't have to do surgery on themselves and people with infections don't have to consciously fight the infection so people with mental health issues shouldn't be required to put any effort either) Be effective regardless of my will (it should work even if I absolutely didn't want it to work)

I'm asking for two reasons: 1. Neuromodulation is a fast developing field. 10 years from now it should be completely mainstream and used for a myriad of psychiatric issues 2. This matter is of personal relevance to me (due to my low affective empathy) I am not well versed in this topic but I do know that affective empathy involves the Anterior Cingulate Cortex, the Anterior Insula and some part of the Prefrontal Cortex but I can't say which one. Advanced neuromodulation will be (in the next 10-15 years) a perfect toll for me if it works since it has the potential of causing significant personality changes without me having to do any kind of work. With regards.

Note that just because someone with Antisocial PD is not a violent criminal doesn't mean they're harmless - in corporate environment they cause massive losses to both companies and workers alike, for various reasons - increased risk taking, corruption/fraud, lower shareholder trust, poor mental health of workers due to toxic work environment etc.