So you have changed the conformist definition of "delusion", right?
Advertisement
by Neko-koku » Mon Aug 19, 2019 8:50 pm
by Gagium » Mon Aug 19, 2019 8:50 pm
Neko-koku wrote:Italios wrote:you really need to learn the definition of delusional lol just stop
Yeah, Copernicus and Einstein were delusional for disagreeing with the fucking crowd..and in a hypothetical mantis world any male mantis who doesn't want to be eaten would be fucking delusional again for mere nonconformism.
FUCK THIS DEFINITION.
by Costa Fierro » Mon Aug 19, 2019 8:51 pm
Italios wrote:it baffles me how anyone would ever think that it's a "delusion" to listen to the primal animal desire to spread your genes as much as possible.
by Italios » Mon Aug 19, 2019 8:52 pm
by Neko-koku » Mon Aug 19, 2019 8:53 pm
Gagium wrote:Neko-koku wrote:Yeah, Copernicus and Einstein were delusional for disagreeing with the fucking crowd..and in a hypothetical mantis world any male mantis who doesn't want to be eaten would be fucking delusional again for mere nonconformism.
FUCK THIS DEFINITION.
Your hypothetical mantis world includes sentient praying mantises that can experience delusion and (ir)rational thought processing? Neat
by Neko-koku » Mon Aug 19, 2019 8:53 pm
by Cekoviu » Mon Aug 19, 2019 8:53 pm
Human sexuality is similar, just less harsh.
by New haven america » Mon Aug 19, 2019 8:54 pm
Neko-koku wrote:Gagium wrote:Your hypothetical mantis world includes sentient praying mantises that can experience delusion and (ir)rational thought processing? Neat
Yes. I'm just using mantises as an example.
The purpose is of course showing the fact that organisms are generally willing to sacrifice a lot of self-interest including life for the sake of reproduction.
New haven america wrote:Neko-koku wrote:How is male praying mantises voluntarily agreeing to be cannibalized NOT delusional? It's a basic evolutionary function, right? Human sexuality is similar, just less harsh.
Actually, they only do that (Cannibalism of their partners) when they're under a large amount of stress.
Like, you know, when other really large animals are watching them fuck.
by Cekoviu » Mon Aug 19, 2019 8:55 pm
Gagium wrote:Neko-koku wrote:Yeah, Copernicus and Einstein were delusional for disagreeing with the fucking crowd..and in a hypothetical mantis world any male mantis who doesn't want to be eaten would be fucking delusional again for mere nonconformism.
FUCK THIS DEFINITION.
Your hypothetical mantis world includes sentient praying mantises that can experience delusion and (ir)rational thought processing? Neat
by Cekoviu » Mon Aug 19, 2019 8:55 pm
New haven america wrote:Neko-koku wrote:
Yes. I'm just using mantises as an example.
The purpose is of course showing the fact that organisms are generally willing to sacrifice a lot of self-interest including life for the sake of reproduction.New haven america wrote:Actually, they only do that (Cannibalism of their partners) when they're under a large amount of stress.
Like, you know, when other really large animals are watching them fuck.
by Kowani » Mon Aug 19, 2019 8:55 pm
by Takso » Mon Aug 19, 2019 8:56 pm
Neko-koku wrote:Takso wrote:
You sound like you've had a lot of unfortunate experiences. If that is so, I am really sorry you had to experience that. There are people out there with certain kinds of personalities that will exploit your kindness and use you to their maximum gain at your maximum loss... But there are also people out there that wish no harm upon others... And love their spouses, children, and others like you wouldn't believe. You know, I used to share a lot of your pessimism, so I can understand where that might come from.
The problem is that I tend to ATTRACT malicious women for whatever reason, hence not dating is the safest choice for me.
Socialist Heronia wrote:Takso wrote:
You sound like you've had a lot of unfortunate experiences. If that is so, I am really sorry you had to experience that. There are people out there with certain kinds of personalities that will exploit your kindness and use you to their maximum gain at your maximum loss... But there are also people out there that wish no harm upon others... And love their spouses, children, and others like you wouldn't believe. You know, I used to share a lot of your pessimism, so I can understand where that might come from.
I've never had the good fortune of ever meeting a kind and caring person like you've described, and that has driven me to try to become one myself. Strange way the mind works.
by Italios » Mon Aug 19, 2019 8:57 pm
by Seangoli » Mon Aug 19, 2019 8:57 pm
by Kowani » Mon Aug 19, 2019 8:59 pm
Seangoli wrote:Neko-koku wrote:OK then the world would be better off if fewer conformists are around to persecute such people.
Copernicus and Einstein weren't visionaries fornbeing different. They were visionaries by presenting coherent thoughts based on sound factual evidence amd argument.
You are spouting nonsensical drivel with no coherent thought, little logic, and at the end of it all just angry opining at the clouds based on a truly astonishly low level of knowledge or understanding of the subject matter.
by Gagium » Mon Aug 19, 2019 9:00 pm
Neko-koku wrote:Gagium wrote:Your hypothetical mantis world includes sentient praying mantises that can experience delusion and (ir)rational thought processing? Neat
Yes. I'm just using mantises as an example.
The purpose is of course showing the fact that organisms are generally willing to sacrifice a lot of self-interest including life for the sake of reproduction.
by Cappuccina » Mon Aug 19, 2019 9:06 pm
Neko-koku wrote:Gagium wrote:Your hypothetical mantis world includes sentient praying mantises that can experience delusion and (ir)rational thought processing? Neat
Yes. I'm just using mantises as an example.
The purpose is of course showing the fact that organisms are generally willing to sacrifice a lot of self-interest including life for the sake of reproduction.
by Nogodia » Mon Aug 19, 2019 9:37 pm
Vaukiai wrote:I am sure that if I say everything the opposite, you don't warn me.
This forum is a jewish dictatorship.
by Page » Tue Aug 20, 2019 12:47 am
by The New California Republic » Tue Aug 20, 2019 1:41 am
Page wrote:I've never before heard of feeding one's children described as microcommunism. Does the OP think toddlers who can't hunt for their own food should starve? Or should they be given food but then start working 12 hours a day after their fifth birthday to start paying off their food debt?
by Attempted Socialism » Tue Aug 20, 2019 3:36 am
Praying Mantistan wrote:Takso wrote:
What you are describing is an abusive relationship and generalizing all committed relationships as such. That is false. Let me tell you that my partner and I are very much in our relationship together... We don't play mind games with each other... And we aren't taking advantage of each other. It is very much a matter of wanting to share a life with someone that you can trust. There's enough pain and suffering in this world already, all we want to do is make each other happy. How does that suck?
I have no idea how this could work. Usually if you treat someone well they abuse you.
Praying Mantistan wrote:Takso wrote:
Sorry you feel that way. I suppose marriage isn't for everyone, but you're wrong that a happy one isn't possible. There are many, many happily married people. Yes, there are also very unhappily married people, it varies you know.
My reasoning is that marriages inherently suck because humans tend to harm each other and oppress each other. They may claim to love each other but all they do is maximizing self-interest at each other's expense and playing the dominance game.
Praying Mantistan wrote:New haven america wrote:I know we're all busy arguing, but I'd just like for everyone to take a second and redirect your attention to the current shape of the poll.
That is all.
Because it is a very deep delusion shared by essentially all organisms. This ratio is expected. For most humans rationality or even self-interest can not override evolutionary instincts.
I will explain how you don’t know what either of those words mean below, but I’ll just reiterate that you find these traits to be universal in families. All families, in your opinion. This massive flaw in your “logic” is rather stupendous: Any counterexample, no matter how anecdotal, will disprove your claim. So, fine: My family is neither collectivist nor feudal, under either the actual uses of those words or your mangled definitions below.
Obviously you shouldn’t have kids (At least not yet). And no one should try to pressure you into having them. Given what you have presented here, you’d be a quite terrible spouse and parent, so unless you change, you’d end up being a self-fulfilling prophecy. However, this externalisation of your own feelings onto people who are good spouses and parents is something you keep doing, even though so far you haven’t shown how it is not good for them, and your attempts have either been laughable (Like your praying mantis debacle of an “argument”), nonsense or (As is your go-to, it seems) assumed based on no argument at all.
Neko-koku wrote:Feudalism: A system where a person has absolute power over another
Communism: A system where a person is forced to transfer resources to another for free
Collectivism: An ideology that individuals must be subjected to some collective
No, you made a strawman based on your own lack of understanding of simple words, then followed it up with a complete red herring…Neko-koku wrote:Socialist Heronia wrote:okay where did that come from...
Mass murder would also work against the good of the species as a whole (fewer people that can make more people and therefore make it slightly less likely that the species is wiped out entirely by some random event) and therefore mass murderers are people that have malfunctioning biological triggers that make them think it's okay to hurt the species by hurting its members. (These triggers are the objective part of morality.) I suppose in that sense each human matters.
I just exposed the completely hilarious idea of collectivism.
… This inane tangent is a complete misunderstanding…I mean...if someone believes that they can live through kids..maybe we indeed need to ask whether they are willing to get lots of clones and die lol. Most aren't lol so they acknowledge that they aren't the same as their genes. What about decriminalizing murder of parents cuz parents never die as long as they still have kids? That's evil, right? So parents do die and can not live through their children. If that's the case then they have demonstrated that even they themselves don't believe in this hilarious ideology which should be summarized as "people are immortal as long as at least one of their offsprings remain alive".
… And everything you said here is wrong.The funny thing here is that these beliefs about infinite bloodlines, collectivism and other nonsense are selected for by evolution..and that humans are predominantly fairly irrational..so hilarity ensued.
While I’m willing to accept the first sentence, you have yet to demonstrate the second. You’ve poked more holes in your own “arguments” than you have even presented coherent arguments yourself.Neko-koku wrote:I don't in fact have a philosophy. All I do is exposing others' common nonsense.
This is either a sincere misunderstanding of what “consistent” means, a massive misunderstanding of what you have presented here, or bait. Given your lack of understanding of other words, I’ll go with option A, but won’t write off B.Neko-koku wrote:I'm just someone who is unusually consistent.
That does not follow. Your misuse of words, and unending supply of strawmen, does not constitute either an argument or a retort. We’ve been over this.Neko-koku wrote:Takso wrote:This point has probably already been made... But if it wasn't for sex, reproduction, and taking care of family, none of us would exist today. That is not delusion, that is fact. What you think of that or if you value your own existence or others is up to you.
Then you admit that you are a collectivist.
I choose to spend a lot of my money on books and alcohol. Nobody is “robbing” me of what I earn; it’s a choice I have. Likewise, when people decide to become parents, they aren’t “robbed” for spending their money on kids; it’s a choice they’ve made. This abuse of words makes almost all your statements incoherent. You may dislike kids – and sure, so do I, which is why I don’t have any and don’t plan to – but your notions and justifications for that come across as pre-teen. You try to universalise your own dislike of families, kids or whatever, and then wreck the English language until you can combine words to support your “arguments”. That’s simply nonsensical. Just look at this:
There’s no argument here. A reference to a mathematician, and some misused words. You’re not trying to convince anybody.Neko-koku wrote:The New California Republic wrote:It doesn't rob him at all. Robbing requires it to be a crime. It isn't a crime since he is consenting to it.
Seriously, stop brutalizing the meanings of words.
The effects are basically the same. Paul Erdos was right. A married man is a slave. A single man is free.
Represented in the World Assembly by Ambassador Robert Mortimer Pride, called The Regicide Assume OOC unless otherwise indicated. My WA Authorship. | Cui Bono, quod seipsos custodes custodiunt? Bobberino: "The academic tone shines through." | Who am I in real life, my opinions and notes My NS career |
by Takso » Tue Aug 20, 2019 5:13 am
by Ethel mermania » Tue Aug 20, 2019 6:31 am
by Kaedijork » Tue Aug 20, 2019 6:39 am
Ethel mermania wrote:Rejecting the importance of family and love I think are one of the greatest delusions of modern times.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Ancientania, Austria-Bohemia-Hungary, Hidrandia, Hurdergaryp, Ifreann, Maximum Imperium Rex, Sarolandia, Second Peenadian, Statesburg, Unidox
Advertisement