dimreepr

Nor is that... I'm trying to discuss a topic, why are you angry with that approach? If you're correct and I'm wrong, then show me how; but don't mock me bc I'm disabled and you might face a cancellation... ;) I've only mocked your arguments, I don't know you...

Mocking my answer's is not an argument, at best it's a logical fallacy, or are you being deliberately obtuse? I note, with interest, that you've yet to answer 'how can one judge one's level of freedom from within one's prison'? No it isn't, it's a description of nirvana AKA no place. "You can't step on the same river twice" is analogous to humanity, every one of us is entirely unique, but we can't help being swept along by the same river, however hard we wish it isn't true... ;)

Why not is there a rule, that I missed? You're thinking about "A Catcher in the rye". The point of the savage, is to be an external criticism of what 'we' consider the norm, for instance, 200 years ago the norm would be our culter accepts that 'god' is real, and you would be the savage as an atheist. OTOH you could sit in your ivory tower and think that my way is the only correct way, I assume you know how dangerous that can be... Only to you, without some sort of synopsis.

A priest can't be an engineer? What if the promise of the afterlife relieves the hardship of the present? I've been thirsty enough to share a dirty water trough with a herd of cow's, my point is you can't know how you'll react in a stressful situation. The Dunning and Krueger crowd will be utterly convinced that, in a life and death situation, they will act in a morally and heroic way, some might, but most of us will try to hide and hope we don't piss our pants. Seems entirely appropriate in a topic labelled 'the false flag of freedom'. How does one know one's level freedom from within one's prison? If you don't do angst then you don't do philosophy, as a palliative I'd recommend 'A Brave New World', and imagine that you're the 'savage'.

It's only seems like an extreme example bc you've never been hungry enough to eat from the gutter; in the unlikely event that you have to choose between eating that dirty morsal or give it to your equally hungrey child, then how could you understand my point. Life Insurance/assurance is only money and you can't eat that... Why are they mutually exclusive? This is not a binary question, for instance, what if one of your darling little athiests wanted to believe that grandad is still 'somewhere' and smiling down on it's godless soul? You should read some Nietzche, start here. The trouble with Occam's Razor is, it's only superficially true at every level...

Reality is thrust upon us whether we would wish it or not. Growing up, to what standard before reality bites? Responsibility is more a question of circumstances, for instance, when does your responsibility to protect your kids by not dying, out weighed by the needs of one of your five kids, in immediate danger? It's an age old fantasy, still shared by many. I think this is more a question of free will than freedom, humans tend to be predisposed to a mystical, god shaped, dimension; how does a rational approach replace that fundamental need? But now that we are free to laugh at the stupid, religious, people, we feel guilty every time we put on our lucky socks.

What about your own self imposed lack of freedom? The reality of freedom in this context is conflating freedom of movement with the freedom to have a guilt free normal nights sleep. Convicts on the run have been reported as being relieved to having been caught, bc they no longer have to face the worry of constantly being hyper-vigilant in every waking moment. Most of us don't inhabit the extremes of these thought's, bc we don't want the responsibility. Most of us are perfectly happy to be led down the path to a brave new world, by means of somer. Aldous Huxley was sure that somer was an artificial god and so, much less potent; which sort of sits with Nietzche and his quest for a substitute to the god we've destroyed.

Have you ever wondered if your sense of freedom, is correct or just another rabbit hole we flee to as an excuse to misunderstand, a reason we hold dear?

I have no doubt that I'm about to be wrong, but... What if dark matter + space/time = gravity and space/time without dark matter = freedom of movement without restriction which = expansion. I think of it as dark matter somehow activates space/time, would that mean there's region's of space in which relativity does not apply? Just a brain fart, but I'd love to know why I'm wrong, preferably in a language I sort of understand...

Imagine 'evil' as an excuse to vent, are you sure that your anger is legitimate and not just a reason to be indignant?

That's like asking for a question that could winkle out a closet vegan or a dedicated BBQer, no question is necessary, just stop talking for a minute or two and they'll tell you... ;)

It's funny how often that doesn't work... One for Alanis...

It takes me a lot longer, to not only read but also a lot more concentration to comprehend the meaning, verbally I can, usually, skip to the end in about the same time.

Speak for yourself, and thanks for the video, but I too lost patience after about 20 mins and skipped to the end/conclusion; all 'they' want is a seat at the table, why are 'we' so afraid of their opinion?

I'm not sure how you think that argues my point? If Ukraine wanted to guarantee sovereignty, all they needed to do, was shove a few secret shekles under the carpet for a rainy day; the threat of a mortal thing, in the animal kindom, is normally enough to restrict the violence to sabre rattling. Imagine if we did give Iran a nuke, it would be like watching a petulant child who got their wish, with their justifiably inflated angry balloon, only to watch it deflate in a shameful smelly fart...

Boris Johnson wanted to give them one of ours, politically stupid, but not a bad idea...

Iran wants the leverage not the missile. This is why it's not well thought out by Trump, his overwhelming power forced Iran into gorilla war tactics and just blow up the shit that matters to it's enemies, the number's will slow down, with time, but the relative impact will increase.

The Ministry of War, basically says it all... Another step to the 'right'... Iran was a manageable threat, the odd strike to keep their attention focused and their hands off the prize, politically it's Israel pulling the strings and religiously the bloody isms are to blame bc they tend to be a reaction to the currant bully.

Why is sheeple a derogatory term?

Verbally, ie. mano a mano and I'm sure I could explain thing's far better (but alas, my affliction) and you'd see that I'm not in the least bit emotional. Yes I'm playing devils advocate, some one should, I'm suggesting that any attempt to steer the ship (guide our evolution) has unseen consiquence. Your Ideas have merit, I don't deny that, but what we're seeing plaid out, here and now. is the reasonable argument being trampled on by ordinary/normal people who don't understand why they're wrong and resent the people who they perceive is sneering at them. Instead of educating them to our level, maybe we should consider educating ourselves to theirs.

Or in star trek terms I intend to continue to question your authority. Honestly, make of that what you will.

Your still arguing that only you, the enlightened, has the correct opinion IOW "the few".

You're still trying to control the narrative, what makes you fit to decide another person's level of intelligence, whatever that means, or the ability to mark a peace of paper in a meaningful way. Do you doubt the intelligence of the hive, or the intelligence of the bee/ant/wildebeest/human???

Most people suffer from the occam's razor effect, the simplest explanation, that I agree with is the correct one. Herd intelligence depends on it.

Is it though? Religions worked for quite a long time. All we can really say is, it work's ATM and it's only fair if one has the vote. So unless democracy relentlessly strives to be better (include more voter's) then it's doomed to be a plaything for the elite.