dimreepr

Doesn't it boil down to the fundamentals of language? I think, will always be different too AI think, however much data about I, it ingests.

I see, thanks. No it's never a free market, they are all subject too the law's and the moral outrage of their culture (the initial conditions). I disagree, within their culture it's fine to profit from the work of the people invested in, but not from the work of money alone. Has Tesco's tried opening a shop in Iran? I have no idea if they have a shop in Iran, but if they have, I bet it was hard work.

I'm not sure how this relates to the post you're quoting? Besides, apathy within our sphere of influence is, I think, just another word for contentment; and within our societal norm's, is desirable. Apathy, when one can positively affect an unjust situation, is deplorable. So apathy is yet another yin-yang of humanity. Every true authority figure would be humble, by definition (because a true leader, leads by example); authority figure does not equal authoritarian.

Only if you're playing a different record...

I suppose I'm talking about values, in the market, over value; and how growth based on values is more sustainable, than growth for the sake of value.

We have to be careful about the narrative of our goals, success doesn't have to mean a happy ending. What if you don't achieve any of them? The story of your road can be successful, if you're happy that you've travelled it.

Well then, I hope your goals are achievable; there is only one world champion.

It can be argued that digging up long dead thread's, to reply without, apparently, reading that thread, in order to provide your wisdom, is egotistical. Your time here may be better spent, in thinking of an original question.

Then why do we tend to measure our success against that of other's? If it's purely subjective then I'm, automatically, more successful than my dead friends...

It's based on value, not money; that's the problem with capitalism. Shariah, by banning monatory interest, introduces the value of investment over the value of the asset; only an accountant can see a value, in striping the asset of it's value.

That's like saying "If a lion could speak/type english, then how would you know it's not human?". Language is much more than just words, fundamentally, it requires a shared culture for true understanding.

All paths are subject to yin-yang; a dark path may lead to light...

I think both questions are equally valid. Indeed, but the difference depends on the culture in which the question is asked; my original question isn't culturally dependant.

What if your plan is to walk into a school and kill as many people as possible?

It means we have to believe in something that we can't possibly know. It's also a metaphor, to teach the value of a concept like karma/heaven.

To be kind?

Do you want to be stupid?

What are you afraid of?

We all are, but that's not the question I asked...

Would you like to think you're stupid?

We all, the vast majority, consider ourselves to be kind (morally correct), the rules are set up for those who aren't. So the question becomes: How are we allowed to cheat, while being kind?

I suspect the answer would be same if the ballot was secret; for instance, in coal mine or building site a show of hand's would yeald, from the same bollot, a result that was inversely proportional. Even a front row forward (rugby) thinks they're smater than a footballer... 😁

Shhh, it's a secret... 😉

Nietzche lamented that we killed god, you thought wrong; besides it was you that claimed an "external consciousness", which can only be supernatural, in every sense of the word. You really should try to learn a little bit, of the sources you profess, in order to prevent the inaccuracies of your thought's; illusionism, for instance, what do you think it means? And why is non-scientific automatically supernatural? My dog is neither. And more to the point, what does any of this have to do with consciousness

An interesting side question is; how many people would describe themselves as above average intelligence, and how that relates to statistical accuracy? I know I am... 🤞