Magic dirt is a myth.
I don't think I advocated for magic dirt. If you want engagement from me, I'm gonna need some expansion from you to show you're not just throwing a strawman at me.
I couldn't remember which Razor it was, so I couldn't check easily. I think I also picked up the reword of ignorance from seeing it frequently paraphrased.
Looking into it now, both wikipedia and infogalactic are using a "never" in the text. But your underlying point is correct; people still use it to deny the possibility of malice.
Infogalactic's page has an amusing addition: "Schneider's Corollary asserts that Hanlon's razor must always be inverted (i.e., so that evil is to be assumed where idiocy is witnessed) in any situation involving politics or other form of social control."
Very interesting.
until you can admit the name of your enemy
Bruh, most people won't even acknowledge that enemies exist. It just seems impossible to them that someone they never even met would hate them and wish for their torment.
If you try to convince them, expect to hear some shit about how you should never attribute an action to malice when it could be ignorance. Real fantasy land stuff.
Realizing enemies exist is a strong red pill on its own. Identifying who the enemies are is a whole other issue.
We'd have to return to self-government by communities of about 250 for that to be different, and even then, it will be different solely because members can make their influence felt as individuals.
That's not far from my wishes. I don't know if there's a proper label, but I am generally unhappy about the large scale nature of...well, just about everything in the modern world. I think humans need to have communities and that's only possible if you aren't walking by hundreds of mysterious strangers in the street every day. No, I do not know how this could be accomplished now, short of extreme scenarios.
I don't think you need an example, but I'll point out that you aren't even american yet you have to deal with our ridiculous cultural exports. It makes life more difficult for you (even if only an irritation) and it should not be your burden.
Your prosperity is in direct competition with their funding. So it most certainly is not in their interests to promote prosperity, at least directly
I hadn't considered this. It's a good point especially when denying personhood to bodies of power. The individual people operating the government have needs just like us, but the government does not have needs like us. This should make it possible to coexist peacefully - even symbiotically.
So you suggest that governments are taking as much as they can. What about the things they can't use? Is the expectation that they will gladly let citizens have the leftovers? Or is the expectation that they will work hard to find a way to use things they weren't using already?
Taxation is already a poor precedent there, as it assumes that citizens can't spend their money effectively on societal needs like infrastructure.
I agree, and that's mostly what I meant. No illusions of serving the public here.
It's troubling when they start making policy decisions under the assumption that we're completely replaceable cogs. It -should- be in best interest to promote a little prosperity and productivity, even if social/cultural cohesion is off the table. I assume the fault lies primarily in managerial disconnect with reality.
Shocking. Moral implications are bleak, but I can't grasp the political implications.
When the government announces that suicide is permissible, it is a statement that they no longer value or rely on the citizenry. The simple explanation may be that all suiciders will be simply replaced with diverse immigrants, but you can't just isolate these things - it changes the whole incentive structure. There aren't many further steps to take before the government decides it's in their best interest to make citizens maximally miserable.
Logistically, who cleans up the mess? Is the whole machine buried with corpse? Who pays for that? Is the corpse dragged out and the machine cleaned of excrement? What happens if the power goes out while someone's inside one, is there a battery? Biggest question: does it lock the door, and if so, when does it lock and who can unlock it?
Ah, right, I forgot you were fairly involved in investment stuff. Makes sense you'd understand the sunken cost thing is intended to apply there. I just wanted to make sure you weren't taking it to an extreme.
Outside of financing, I disagree that emotions should necessarily be discarded. Personally, if my emotions get me in trouble, I try to either update the data that the emotions came out of or I try to remember to be more logical for whatever type of matter it was. Most of the time, it is a choice to rely on emotions (I consider instinct and reflex as similar forms of non-logic), so one should take responsibility for that choice if it results in failure or trouble.
Although, similar to your Warren Buffett example, I think it's alright to fuck up a lot as long as you eventually straighten up. Some people are just slow learners, after all. Such a person should feel like a retard for wasting resources - and once a cetain threshold is reached on that waste, it becomes impossible to justify even with success. I'm reluctant to apply this strictly, because I see too many people give up where they're mis-evaluating their waste vs potential gain.
Np, gave me a chance to cross check definitions with other users here.
I'm sure you've noticed there are some small conflicts here. It's no surprise that bystanders become confused when things occasionally degrade into namecalling. New slang naturally pops up, and anyone that wasn't present for its introduction will be out of the loop.
I have to ask now: do you trust your own emotions? I don't mean as a guiding beacon for making decisions, either. What you just said implies that you can't ever trust that your emotions are anything but illusions and trickery.
If you want to ignore/discard your emotions, that's your right, of course. But "sunken cost fallacy" applies outside of emotions as well, and I don't want to see people crippled by self-doubt.
I can't say I agree with your definitions, but I appreciate seeing what other people think about it, so thanks for that.
I was actually meaning to ask you about it, thank you for volunteering the information.
Sorry, I wasn't clear with that speculation. I was meaning more along the lines of how people have changed the term boomer to be - if not outright dismissive - meaning something like "person who has traded the wellbeing of their children for some extra money or comfort, or is likely to do so if given the opportunity now".
The way I see tradcuck used online, it's in a similar vein as that, except where boomers are implicitly too naive to know any better, tradcucks relish their own failures (this stems from the use of "cuck"). This is where I personally become uncomfortable, because a naive man can learn and change, but a person seeking failure is irredeemable.
I can't say I really follow the example of Nick Fuentes, as I have no idea who that is, but you mentioning "mgtow/incel" in the same sentence reminds me that local lad impossible1 is actually where I first noticed the term tradcuck being tossed around.
Tradcuck seems to mean the person is adhering to tradition even though it is not in their best interest to do so.
Stormfag is for anyone that fits into the stereotypes of the userbase of stormfront (I may have gotten the site's name wrong). An easy qualifier for the label is promoting the solidarity of whites or attacking jews. Basically like a backup term for nazi.
These are based off of observation, so if anyone has anything to add, I'm open to updating my definitions. Tradcuck in particular I'm wondering if it has any relation to "boomer".
edit: added a guess for site name
If I really think about it, this is terrifying. I want some serious studies done on this phenomenon and I want these people to get the treatment needed to evolve into humans.
Just..thinking about what my life would be like without the ability do some of the mental processing I do every day, it's actually scary. I might want to kill myself if I became like that. Do they gain some other ability in its place? Is it like autism where you can basically be a retard while being really good at math?
I always hoped this stuff was just a joke.
Originally it was going to be based on using the dewey decimal codes for the books but we decided that was too much.
Please elaborate. Especially since it won't be utilized.
I like hearing about design ideas.
Yeah, it's certainly a messy situation. Some of those laws need to go, but it seems like a tall order right now.
So, while "vote with your wallet" is not working as intended, it can at least act as a vital support for any business that's managing to steer away from this ESG thing.
Now, if there were some simple method for the public to view whether a business is receiving this ESG funding, maybe some kind of campaign for awareness or activism could arise.
Well, let's hope neither path comes to fruition.
Useful idiots are still a thing no matter who you think is an enemy, and sometimes they act before their handlers/masters can react.
ESG is quite awful, but I'm unclear on how a company could avoid playing ball. Would it be sufficient to never become a publicly traded company?
I'd be more afraid of it getting expanded to be able to induce the hermaphrodite mutation. It would make tranny advocates very happy to have all new humans born that way, as it would normalize surgical genital modification. It can be politically spun from legislation that gives children the right of medical autonomy.
Huh. That's an interesting development, as I've had .md force me to use javascript a couple of times. I loved .is because it did not. Maybe they're trying to fix what wasn't broken.
I've been trying to stay out of this constant slapfighting, but I have not seen a good effort from you on that front (nor on the other parties' front). There is a simple and direct approach to this: ask the other person what it would take to convince them to rethink things. If they cannot answer, then there is nothing to discuss, as it's "npc" territory.
However, this applies to you as well. I'm not going to ask because I'm too old to bother trying to change minds on a forum, but you should be prepared to answer if you wish to prove that you hold a logical position in good faith.
And like many people, are not truly alive. Some don't make choices, but just react to their environment in the only way they can.
block
Just checked, still doesn't work.
Was actually my first thought, which confused me, as I thought it was exclusive to american blacks. Looks like the problem goes further than I thought.
My present theory is that most people that demand respect (or habitually complain about disrespect) actually mean "obedience". The samples I've examined all seemed to think respect is born out of fear. This headline exhibits the same, as it aims to make people afraid of minding their own business by promoting harassment.