what’s the fine for this: https://youtu.be/CyJvZ1IS-bI?si=VI-KVW6baIUr9DuE ?

https://pastebin.com/5ENcTSw4

Sort of fallacious to go from one case of time to happen and derive probability from it.

I’m no biologist but I don’t think any of our models of super early stuff are sophisticated enough to speculate on what stages are the most or least likely.

I have legit lost sleep over the first quote from “they thought they were free” listed here:

https://www.facinghistory.org/sites/default/files/2023-04/Reading_Do_You_Take_the_Oath.pdf

Yeah but you understand the difference between the state and the people who lived there right? Like Jewish settlers came from Europe, to the place Palestinian people were and had been living in.

They have a connection to the state of Palestinian (inasmuch as it exists given differing degrees of recognition) by way of having moral rights to continue living on the land they live on regardless of what some lines on a map call it.

do you have concerns about buying American stuff? I mean the usa just got outed running an antivax campaign to kill Asian people while hoarding vaccines.

States aren’t your friend yo

I’m not raging I’m Australian.

There’s no fucking antenna that pops out of people’s heads and overrides their thoughts when considered in abstract. That’s Murdoch rag level of boomer bullshit.

Idk what broken arse society you feel like you’re from but humans everywhere work towards the collective all the time. You try to come up with some derranged “actually we don’t support the vulnerable” because propaganda about costs is written about and yet even in the face of that people continue to not attack each other in the streets. Oh capitalism is cannabalism is it? fucking derranged take but even so you just conveniently ignore how that system is enforced by a tiny minority and billions of people struggle against it or try to tame it. Oh climate change inaction huh? yes sure if you judge us all by the fucked up leaders of states but what about all the protests? what about all the climate scientists? The journalists writing about? what about the fact that greenwashing is an effective marketing strategy?

Like I’m sorry that Shazza and Bazza on the street don’t know how to tackle massive structural issues but it is absolutely a lobotomised take to think that means they’re not decent creatures.

“The masses” are just individuals. You sound like a 20 year old who just discovered atheism and started reading the paper.

you need to spend less time online and more time talking to your neighbours.

neither are the people claiming humans are, as a herd, fairly dumb and incredibly selfish

wtf? by what standard?

Humans frequently band together during disaster, humans care for their young and old, humans don’t typically engage in cannibalism of the weak, humans rarely fight to the death or even serious injury, we live in cities of millions with astonishingly low rates of violence etc etc

where is this terrible selfish stupid behaviour? what standard are you comparing the species to? we’re more violent than orangutans but they’ve never set up water sanitation so I think we can call ourselves smart and we’re less violent than chimps or gorillas… are you comparing us to fictitious ideal beings or what?

Humans are wonderful. Not always good, not always reasonable, but wonderful.

We are rich, nuanced, vibrant beings. A small portion of us are defectors but by and large we are community focused and willing to give when we feel we are not being taken advantage of.

Unless you think all your friends, yourself, and your family are garbage it is inconsistent to assume a random sampling of humans would not display the same prosocial traits you find in them.

The one thing we are incapable of doing though is handling power.

Yeah. I am not a Buddhist but I’ve always found something rings true in the reflections on impermanence. When we bond with someone we accept the pain of loss, and when we feel it most people seem to describe relief once able to “let go” an accept it being over.

It seems to me that encouraging clinging and reminiscening stunts you a bit and only really provides temporary relief of the loss while drawing out the time it takes to process it.

Idk though, maybe I’ll have the misfortune to feel differently some day. It’s hard to judge someone hanging out with their spouse watching death creep closer each day. I have approximately zero idea what my opinions would be in the face of that.

My wife is fortunately still alive so maybe that colours my view. However when I’ve lost other people the blessed anaesthesia of forgetting has been essential in being able to function.

From the short quote it seems like she maybe has a healthy-ish attitude but idk… I feel like this would be a shallow simulacrum that prolongs grief.

AM but it can just write bad sonnets about hate and make up shennanigan maximising answers to questions.

Look I believe in you and remember goodness isn’t a place you reach it’s a path you walk. If you stray a little that’s no reason to stop trying. Everyone has bad days when we don’t behave to standards that we want to, the important thing is that we keep trying and do better next time.

Just follow your heart and don’t give up :)

The most charitable read I can see is

1 - everyone dies 2 - I assume without evidence that death is generally unpleasant and painful 3 - I assume without evidence animals don’t have complex internal worlds and desires for things like freedom or long life 4 - I assume the lives animals lead in farms is good 5 - I am a naive utiliarian and see no issues with mere addition/the repugnant conclusion 6 - a quick death does not count negatively in a utiliarian sensw C - therefore we should breed as many animals as we can, kill them whenever convenient as long as they are not old, and this makes the world better.

I do not see how 1 through 3 connect to 4 through 6. And 4 through 6 is just the repugnant conclusion.

deleted by creator

That is not a chain of reasoning, would you mind trying again. Step by step please.

edit: most charitable read (they blocked me?)

The most charitable read I can see is

1 - everyone dies 2 - I assume without evidence that death is generally unpleasant and painful 3 - I assume without evidence animals don’t have complex internal worlds and desires for things like freedom or long life 4 - I assume the lives animals lead in farms is good 5 - I am a naive utiliarian and see no issues with mere addition/the repugnant conclusion 6 - a quick death does not count negatively in a utiliarian sensw C - therefore we should breed as many animals as we can, kill them whenever convenient as long as they are not old, and this makes the world better.

I do not see how 1 through 3 connect to 4 through 6. And 4 through 6 is just the repugnant conclusion.

Kinda yeah.