If you want to discuss something seriously, /dis/ is your place

Search /dis/ threads

Password  (for post and file deletion)

Apr 1Progress! At long last, we have the beginnings of a functional combined site ready to preview publicly. Feel free to take our new beta area for a test drive and point out any bugs you see.
Mar 31With the Merger coming up soon, we have created an official steam group for the combined sites. It can be found at http://steamcommunity.com/groups/PonychanSteam

File 139632204169.jpg - (96.50KB , 800x1000 , maudafternoon.jpg )
77638 No. 77638 [View]

Let's talk about those things I put in the Subject. Immortality is Royal Night Guard's waifu, and I believe he's said more than once that he "intends to live forever".

So let's ask everyone some interesting questions, and I can pretend I'm not just asking RNG.

-Would you want to be immortal?
-Why do you want to be immortal?
-Why don't you want to be immortal?
-Do you believe immortality is even possible?
-What do you think of death?
12 posts omitted. (Expand)
>> No. 77699
File 139724977615.png - (25.78KB , 157x157 , 154 t.png )
>I have to admit, I find RNG's fear of death a subject of fascination - and i don't mean to sound belittling to you, Cdirus. You're a respectable mind to me. I just find people and their bits and pieces central to them to be interesting.
I'll take it as flattering rather than belittling :3

>I wonder if his anxiety about death might be lessened through psychedelic assisted therapy? . . . However, I don't think he wants to 'deal' with it
I've thought about this before. I know a psychoanalyst whose research interests are in the beneficial application of psychoactive substances. But yes, I think it is not always a good thing to remove someone's fear. And perhaps neither is it good to be too quick to try and solve problems with medication or substances.

>I wonder if this want, this fear, stems from a linear-view of life? As in 'once you're alive you're alive until your're dead, thats it'. Thats an acceptable current view.
Of course. I don't want to stop existing and it seems at least very plausible that that's what death means. Death is something to be feared and the best choice is to take whatever constructive actions you can to avoid dying.

>I just wonder if it isn't something more cyclical. Nature doesn't produce too many linear dead ends it seems. Things get recycled . . .
I think you have this backwards. When you die the parts that made you up will likely decompose and nature will recycle them into something new, but that something will not be a new, healthy you. Humans are the ones who rebuild the original from recycled parts.
>> No. 77701
I would love to be immortal. I am pretty discontent with the state of technology and society as of now. Though at the same time I want to live for the sake of self preservation. To that end I would prefer immortality to be a privilege granted to me and a select few others.To me, immortality is not a question of possibility. It's a matter of when and how hard is going to be to achieve and maintain. There is no reason why a human could not live forever one day, or for at least as long as the universe exists.
>> No. 77703
>-Would you want to be immortal?
If I am alive and the option is available I would create an avatar. Can kind of already do it with current data collection methods, if I had access to what 'some others' had access to I'd have much clearer picture of me.

>-Why do you want to be immortal?
Because it is an option, though I'd have some issue struggling to justify why I should BE immortal to myself: I ultimately see the reality of things is that we should have cyborgs and avatars of ourselves within a few decades. People are going to do it. Things are going to get strange because our society isn't set up to handle immortal people, moreso dynasties of finance and ownership. If these people become immortal... I worry. They should be contained as holograms. They then can have their wishes of power and control in a controlled environment.

>-Why don't you want to be immortal?
I would feel left out of the cycle of death. Is there something more? Do I dissipate into the ether? Is dying its own life experience and there is a way nature has to recycle me back into the stream when its my turn or sort me into a different medium beyond my matter when I die? Who knows. I don't know.

>-Do you believe immortality is even possible?
Its more than possible its pending.

File 139677995574.jpg - (26.88KB , 460x329 , hAC6CA7DC.jpg )
77668 No. 77668 [View]

I hate these people. I seriously want them to get ran over, all at once, as a group, by a bus full of nuns.

The pain from banging my head against their walls of stupidity is getting too much. Not sure if I can continue to throw their insipid theories back in their faces, only to have them peal them off of said gesicht, rinse them out and toss the damn things back at me.

Why do we allow this special kind of stupid to propagate? Why can't we just put the poor things down easy?

In the interest of further discussion, how do you deal with these kinds of people when you run into them?
Have you ever successful convinced someone of just how wrong they are?
How does one combat ignorance when that ignorance uses "Ignore" and it's super effective?
5 posts omitted. (Expand)
>> No. 77674
NWO is upon us.
We have all been already chipped with RFID.
>> No. 77677
I believe the one about drones being able to home in on and track/fire tracking missiles at cell phones though. That seems like a fucking legit use of a military drone that you just would be crazy not to implement.
>> No. 77688
Jews run the world.

File 139389505117.jpg - (26.31KB , 230x340 , 46756-33701.jpg )
77479 No. 77479 [View]
Hey Graham!

I saw this and I thought it might be something you would be interested in.

In today’s talk, Christopher Ryan, the co-author of Sex at Dawn with Cacilda Jethá, takes a deeper look at the standard narrative of human sexual evolution we’ve long upheld: men provide women with goods and services in exchange for women’s sexual fidelity. According to this model, Ryan points out, the war between the sexes is built into our DNA.

But based on their research, Ryan and Jethá have quite a few bones to pick with this narrative. Ryan explains that our sexual patterns are an outgrowth of agricultural models—which accounts for only about five percent of human history. For the other 95 percent, human sexuality was “a way of establishing and maintaining the complex flexible social systems, networks, that our ancestors were very good at.” In hunter-gatherer societies, there were overlapping sexual relationships between members of a community—a more fluid system than the Victorian model we’re wedded to today. In fact, several contemporary societies around the world argue against the sexual myth we’ve built up, too.

“My hope is that a more accurate updated understanding of human sexuality will lead us to have greater tolerance for ourselves, for each other, greater respect for unconventional relationship configurations like same-sex marriage or polyamorous unions, and that we’ll finally put to rest the idea that men have some innate instinctive right to monitor and control women’s sexual behavior,” Ryan says. “And we’ll see that it’s not only gay people that have to come out of the closet: we all have closets we have to come out of.”
13 posts omitted. (Expand)
>> No. 77653
I don't wnat to put that responsibility on you for some reason as it was me who didn't have the time.

I recently just got let go though.

I have time now just have to ease back into the lifestyle of being free again.
>> No. 77658

Yes. yes I have a lot. Here are the things I suppose in no particular order would happen and I have at least some vague notion of why each of these would happen.

a very large shift toward world peace, egalitarianism, significant drops in violence, stronger communities, and concepts where 'groups' of people consider themselves the parents (or responsible as parents) of children, bigger families, less homelessness, and an intensely more empathic society
>> No. 77659

I think we maybe misunderstood?

You asked why I posted the blog you posted right?

It was just a pure mistake. We have common interests. I actually had skimmed this earlier, so referenced it in my memory, looked it up, and shared it because it was relevant.

It was just a bit more relevant than I had realized *lol*

File 139541050968.jpg - (28.70KB , 604x233 , image.jpg )
77620 No. 77620 [View]

I want to become a dolphin.

>in another life
2 posts omitted. (Expand)
>> No. 77623
File 139545008474.gif - (768.69KB , 400x247 , GIognFP.gif )
If anything I could be other than a human, it would be a dolphin
>> No. 77628
File 139571820622.gif - (13.53KB , 501x585 , jewfeel.gif )
>you will never be a dolphin
>> No. 77637
File 139625489153.jpg - (220.41KB , 960x744 , rapecave.jpg )
>rape niggas all day
>people think you're adorable and still want to swim alongside you
shit that's the fucking life right there.

File 139484786417.jpg - (36.30KB , 705x763 , twiwhatt.jpg )
77593 No. 77593 [View]

This thread isn't about stand up comedians, because they joke about everything and it's hard to discuss sensibly. I'm talking about jokes on kids' TV or in family movies. It seems that things like two men accidentally ending up in romantic/sexual positions, or men being "dressed like women", are played for humor. I'm sure there are instances of racism and many other things, but I'm just pointing out what I noticed most/bothered me personally.

I was watching "Cheaper by the Dozen 2" because it was on Nickelodeon and I have nothing better to do, and there's a scene where an adult man leaning on another's shoulder is considered unusual and disruptive to a theater-going audience. It's not like the movie is about realistic interactions in socially stressful situations or anything, so it was played for humor.

There are other examples, but that's the most recent I could think of. I admit to being a fairly weak person, but has anyone else noticed that, or been bothered by it? It just seems so out of place in movies that generally have themes of friendship, understanding, or togetherness.
8 posts omitted. (Expand)
>> No. 77605
File 139507126304.png - (20.78KB , 150x136 , twilight_sparkle_at_the_spa_by_pikamander2-d4vh8f9.png )
Do you have an example of the sort of witticism that you are thinking about? As I mentioned in my post above I think that a lot of humor has the purpose of reducing tension. But that does not mean that this is all that humor does.

I also agree that there should be a sensitivity to how the joke works. Not all humorous portrayals involve a tension that is insensitive, serious or discriminatory. There should be some sort of reason at all levels.


>How is it odd for a straight man to do effeminate things? Why is effeminacy in men considered something only gay people have?
Culture. We are trained to think that certain things are appropriate for defined groups of humans. The groups can be defined by race, sex, belief, politics and many other things. Why Jews restricted to specific businesses in some parts of history? Why can't women show their hair in many countries? Why were some groups of citizens allowed to opt out of the required military service in Israel until recently?

For as many ways that we can divide ourselves into groups, we can probably attach different emotional sentiments to those groups and find characteristics, roles, and other things to use to create differentiations based on those emotions. So right now we have a bunch of arbitrary sets of behaviors assigned to gender and sex and if you muck with that there are lots of people willing to take that personally, and laugh at a joke that uses those personal feelings.
>> No. 77625
File 139554023753.png - (618.70KB , 997x492 , maudrock.png )

You seem to be referring to insecurity. These specific things that people laugh about can make them discomforted/insecure (which causes tension), right?
>> No. 77634
File 139593653133.png - (91.69KB , 773x747 , emotion.png )
>You seem to be referring to insecurity. These specific things that people laugh about can make them discomforted/insecure (which causes tension), right?

Maybe? Insecurity causes tension. But are they really synonyms here? I'm being serious because I'm still thinking about all of this myself. One of my favorite mental images when it comes to humor and it's use here is actually a scene from Braveheart when the The Battle of Stirling is taking place. The Scottish are facing off with the English and they start mooning the English. When I think about that scene I have to ask myself, what is humor doing there in a functional sense?

What does showing your ass to a opposing force do on an emotional level? It replaces fear (a source of tension) from my perspective, but perhaps this perspective can be mad more precise. Tension can probably be caused by all the negative emotions, but how humor relates to them is likely different.
*Tension from violated gender norms (Disgust? Loathing? Embarrassment?)
*Tension from a sense of military opposition? (Fear? Terror? Apprehension?)
*What forms of humor deal with anger?

I'm sure there is plenty of room to think about this issue and I've only thought about it as much as I can.

File 139519598537.jpg - (5.24KB , 294x171 , index.jpg )
77614 No. 77614 [View]
How to run for public office
1 run with the Tea Party Conservative Republicans 2 study the issues 3 run for office 4 hire Jon Stewart of The Daily Show to endorse your opponent. 5 win a landslide victory
1 post omitted. (Expand)
>> No. 77617
idiot op
>> No. 77618
File 139519744441.jpg - (61.03KB , 640x512 , confidence-mouse-trap-cheese-demotivational-posters-1392170018.jpg )
I fully endorse OP's strategy

Pic related
>> No. 77626
File 139555308915.jpg - (9.63KB , 259x194 , images2.jpg )
listen here u lil shit

File 139234404239.jpg - (138.74KB , 900x600 , 647.jpg )
77260 No. 77260 [View]
How does one deal with overwhelming misanthropy?
I'm not the religious type, but I'm convinced that when religion condemned the nature of man it was more right than anyone in history ever was and the more I learn about humanity the more I am disgusted with it.
I cannot describe to you how revolted I am by it and how much hate and loathing I have in me for it; words do not suffice. I know desiring the end humanity is nothing strange, but I hold them in such contempt and so unworthy of existence that it's starting to make me unbalanced.
I used to be able to at least see individual people as individual people, but now I'm starting to see even family members as degenerate consequence of their genes as everyone else and just as unworthy of existence as them.
31 posts omitted. (View thread)
>> No. 77612
File 139508184307.png - (25.78KB , 157x157 , 154 t.png )
>This is again, a confusion of teleological meaning and value.
>. . .those side effects which had once helped us to replicate, desire and fear in particuliar, have jammed and no longer function for the reasons they were selected since they have been removed from their niche. They are meaningless now.
>>And this is nessessarily thus an evil . . .
Right, well I think we already know how any discussion of meaning and value between us is going to go.

>Memetics is just as subjective to the principles of evolution as biological processes are! That's what makes it memetics in the first place.
There is a grander set of principles which cover both biological features and psychological ideas, behaviours, etc. but 'evolution' usually refers to just the biological. I assume that's what the OP is talking about.

>Humans are no smarter or powerful than natural selection. Is a computer smart? Yet the plastic case that surrounds this computer, you would not also call this smart, would you? It does nothing, because it is the motherboard and electronics which do the thinking. Yet you would certainly not call an isolated wire which would otherwise form a piece of this motherboard intelligent, would you? It is not the components you are describing as intelligent, but the process, the change in information between input and output.
No, in this metaphor humanity would be the microprocessor, or at least a microprocessor embedded in the whole. If the process of natural selection ceased to function humanity would still be smart and powerful, moreso than natural selection itself.
>> No. 77613
The word 'goal' describes an aspect of awareness. evolution cannot realize it is being thwarted and actively take steps zgainst that, like a person or group of people can.
>> No. 77619
>The word 'goal' describes an aspect of awareness. evolution cannot realize it is being thwarted and actively take steps zgainst that, like a person or group of people can.
Human awareness does not exist as a quality distinct from that of the input into any process, be it merely running water, mathematic equations, or a single cell.

Qualia, conscioussness, and the self exist only as illusions.

Any input into a reaction nessessarily produces an output of some sort else it wouldn't be part of the process. Evolution is not a thing that reacts, it is the reaction to something. And any process that promotes homeostasis of which evolution is one is taking steps to neutralise events that would cease it.

Regardless of that, it is clear that we are not using the same meaning of the word goal.

>Right, well I think we already know how any discussion of meaning and value between us is going to go.

File 139263983756.jpg - (64.36KB , 700x311 , bechdel-test-e1384150631581.jpg )
77291 No. 77291 [View]

Colin Stokes poses us a question in this TED video at 9:09.

He is asking of a statistic he quotes about sexual assailants, and then of society in general in regards to what we might be getting from media and movies from a very young age
>"Are they(we) absorbing the story that a male hero's job is to defeat the villain with violence and then collect the reward - who is a woman who has no friends and doesn't speak?"

What do you think?

Last edited at Mon, Feb 17th, 2014 05:24

25 posts omitted. (View thread)
>> No. 77607
File 139507373534.png - (23.37KB , 134x150 , twilight_sparkle_vector_by_piranhaplant1-d4euua3.png )
>I think a point that was overlooked in this thread is that, while male protagonists are more common, female protagonists are more likely to feature in these unconventional conflicts.

I can agree with this. I don't really "blame" history for what it was and it did involve a long period of time with particular portrayals being emphasized. So independent of what we might be trying to do in our groups today knowing what wend on before is always a good idea.

So yeah I can see that women would have been featured in different sorts of conflicts from physical combat despite the presence of women warriors in history. But I'm not sure that "unconventional" is the best way of looking at it. Non-physical certainly. It's just that other sorts of conflict are also a conventional part of our stories. Domestic conflict, political conflict, economic conflict for example.

Do you have some examples in mind? I would be interested in seeing them.

I don't know about "primal division", but I agree that throughout our evolution there will be some places where there has been a social difference in what the males and females do (and our evolution is informed by our history). I also agree that the limitations of child-bearing have left something of a mark on the genders where there is a feature that clearly takes "sides" in terms of a biological female (but the dimensions of these"marks" are under debate and study).
>> No. 77616

"What do you think?"

I think he's one of the those dicks that think mass media exist solely as their personal soapbox to spread their ideology.
>> No. 77822

File 138967151430.jpg - (45.57KB , 395x481 , Sugar_cover-sfSpan.jpg )
76591 No. 76591 [View]

I wanted to share this PLOS ONE blog entry and then ask what you think about it / about sugar?

I also think the history of sugar is very interesting and worth talking about if you want to or prefer. A grossly abbreviated version at wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_sugar

This ties a bit into my perspective that we should all be including less corporations in our diet when possible, given that they will add this substance in gratuitous amounts to anything that it helps to sell.
13 posts omitted. (Expand)
>> No. 76613
>I think that makes the idea unworkable and dangerous.

I'm sorry if I'm somehow misrepresented, but I am thinking packaging this as a service and capturing the cash flow into the model where it can be directed to several points intelligently, not as a totalitarian solution to all the worlds ills.

But, enough of them I think - enough at least to make real growth happen in real people's communities and lives, because local would be a big focus, which makes recapturing financial 'energy'. If it could be recaptured it becomes its own market economy at a certain point - a certain point for locations, and not for nations. It would have to actually grow that big.

I really think if the grocery stores and corporations can completely dominate the basic requirement of life to feed, then their model of replacing models with ones people tend to prefer has to be of utmost importance. Though admittedly, I would value this authoritarian overlord of a policy to be implemented globally and probably jump up to help, I have no realistic expectation to be the one mandating it as law.

>That's how all corporations work.
>> No. 76614
>I'll have to review my source for this then.

What I've been hearing constantly from other people is that the nutrient levels in industrial agriculture are often low because of lack of diversity of nutrients in the soil and nutrient flow in the monoculture 'desert'. A desert is actually an interesting comparison, while it seems a desert of fertility it is a desert of biology, energy flow, and novelty.

There are a whole lot of variables that can influence nutrition for plants, but generally speaking if you reduce the total number of variables that are able to influence nutrition to a very low number, I would imagine you'll get a low nutritional value in comparison with more variables at work.

I don't have any data or comparisons to think of though, but what I know about plants and growing suggests a rich and thriving ecosystem keeps materials circulating and generates lots of organic material that serves as nutrition for other organisms, a monoculture loses soil and soaks chemicals into the ground. I am no master gardener though. I just listen to people talk about it 96% of the time, and do it about 4% :)
>> No. 77573

WHO recommends cutting your 'free sugar' intake to just 5% of your daily calories - however, adjusts the bar to 10% simply out of realistic expectations as we have already an incredibly highly sugared up diet.

These guidelines are based on a collection of 120 scientific papers you can reference at the link below.


To give you some perspective, a 5% daily intake of 'free sugars' is roughly one half of a can of soda

File 139413076422.gif - (0.96MB , 500x313 , celestia_eating_a_banana_.gif )
77501 No. 77501 [View]
So I got with and made love with this chubby ginger chick today, and it got me thinking..

Who cares if somebody is fat? Long as they genitals.
40 posts omitted. (View thread)
>> No. 77558
File 139432978387.jpg - (68.66KB , 600x756 , 1373284132-0.jpg )
It's funny, the 'Why are girls more sexualized than boys?' thread was actually pretty interesting. And I think there is some discussion to be had with the 'Who cares if somebody is fat?' part of the thread, but unfortunately, it was wrapped in a distraction, lol.
>> No. 77561
File 139439109974.png - (162.92KB , 995x802 , 131042127893.png )
That might be a good idea. I thought about it when we made the decision but we decided that everyone here might be able to take it in stride and talk about the subject.

Do you mean in the OP?

I agree that the subject itself is fine. I have no problems with you moving this thread over there (if that was you). I've just been wondering about if there were opinions about quality control other than the OP. Maybe it's a slow week, or people were busy, or the subject is not as interesting for something more serious to everyone, but when there were no replies I thought I would use this to ask questions about the policy.

There still might be discussion. It could be that people are still getting used to seeing threads that have a bunch of craziness over here and are not sure how to start a more serious tangent.

Last edited at Sun, Mar 9th, 2014 11:53

>> No. 77566
File 139440301041.jpg - (84.89KB , 960x540 , lol.jpg )
the board, mang.
You know, as a joke because lately one or two sexual threads got moved here because

File 139344705046.gif - (155.23KB , 700x990 , tumblr_msr2l5jil51sqotgwo1_1280.gif )
77375 No. 77375 [View] [Last 50 posts]
Why are girls more sexualized than boys?
79 posts omitted. (View thread)
>> No. 77554
>War is always a zero-sum game.
If it's possible for both parties to loose, then wouldn't war NOT be a zero-sum game?
>> No. 77555
This is only the case in a state of total war.
>> No. 77563
File 139439559700.png - (22.04KB , 140x150 , clover_the_clever_vector_by_kyute_kitsune-d4jooau.png )
I think that it unavoidably shifts to equal rights (or something related) because of the five relationships that I mentioned.
*Group (society)-Men
*Group (society)-Women
Any of these things that a group is complaining about can have a relationship in these categories reinforcing the objectionable social pressure. That is why I made the comments that I did >>77472, >>77493, >>77495. I'm not trying to point out anyone in particular but I have naturally seen (and thought I was potentially seeing) the pattern start up where different people start using a counter example as some sort of argument, where the problem is both examples and all the relationships keeping them going.

>You could say "people feel pressured to conform to generalized standards." and include everybody in the discussion.
That is the goal, but the problem is effectively dealing with the reality that we have now, created by the history that existed. I do not believe that it is possible to get us to people without addressing specific behaviors that are unique to each group. There are details specific to men that are different from details specific to women and that requires creating conceptual categories that only look at men-men, women-women, men-women, society-men, and society-women behavior dynamics. We can't just use a people category because that will not give us effective

File 138283540575.gif - (177.32KB , 150x134 , 304[1].gif )
76040 No. 76040 [View]
So, I was wandering the interwebs and I discovered this gem.

Let's talk about racism, but more importantly why.

Be warned there's a fair bit of speculation so if I speculate wrong say so.

Africans are fleeing the dangers of their home and their own destruction. This isn't an uncommon story, sadly. This, or similar but less extreme situations, happen all over the world. In America we have ongoing issues with immigration and immigration laws, but laws and the nations feelings towards immigrants may be much different in other countries for a number of reasons.
"Protecting the State" is actually a legitimate concern in some countries more intent on maintaining the status quo. America is actually quite lenient with and even 'inviting' immigration. In all of American history up until recently it seems it's been the place to go to escape dangers and hardships of refuge's homes even with racism among it's people. I don't believe most countries aren't like this. Coming from American background the whole situation sounds deplorable, but if you think about it from a nationalists perspective they believe their concerns are legitimate.
The video talked about Europe closing it's borders to this group of people fleeing their homes. This too, likely, isn't all too uncommon.
This raises a few questions. Why didn't Israel not let them in like European countries if they do not want immigrants? Why let them in and then write laws making it incredibly difficult to live if you're giving them refuge? How big a force is trying to evacuate the immigrants from Israel? Does or doesn't the government want African refugees?
3 posts omitted. (Expand)
>> No. 77545
While I don't condone racism, I can see why Israel might not want immigrants
1) America is a country that has a lot of imigration because it's so large geographically. Israel is about the size of New Jersey and half of the country is desert. Geographically, the country can't support more than 25 million people at most, (its current population is a little under 8 million)
2) Israel has from its founding, been a Jewish country. Although "Jewish" can mean either a religion or an ethnicity, the country was founded in 1948 when the region of Palestine was split into an Arab country (today Jordan) and a (Jewish country today Israel). This was just after the holocaust and the Jewish community felt the need for a military and a sovereign nation-state. They continue to want a majority Jewish country.

These are reasons I came up with, although I also think there is some racism within the country.
>> No. 77550
File 139428032621.png - (685.46KB , 836x544 , Dean 5.png )
Yeah, in the same way calling people "Christians" or "Americans" is bad.

Unless of course you were responding to something ironically, in which case I'm agreeing with you, so, cool.
>> No. 77556
Also I should add that for a country to accept immigrants, it needs to have a demand for a larger workforce. The USA at the turn of the century was a rapidly growing industrial power that had a surplus of jobs available. Israel may not need a large workforce, and many of the immigrants and existing citizens might not be able to find work. Economics also plays a role in it. The video also seems to have a bias.

That being said, I speak hebrew and the translation was pretty accurate, and I do think some people were being racist. I could understand what Ben-Ari was saying in the video, but not all the people yelling in the protests. Racism and prejudice are wrong. Even ethnocentrism is wrong, but racism is not the only reason for not letting immigrants in.

You can compare it to illegal immigration from Mexico in the USA. The US government shouldn't allow anyone to cross the boarder, but the Americans need to remember that these are people; human beings searching for a better life. Unfortunately, some Americans and Israelis alike view Mexicans/Africans/foreigners as something less than human; ethnocentric dehumanization. This is what causes racism.

File 136656443348.png - (174.93KB , 900x819 , no_sonic_rainboom___twilight_sparkle_by_theairgonaut-d4rfbyj.png )
72740 No. 72740 [View]

So, I've been graduated from college since December, but I don't have any idea what I want to do with my life or where to go from here. I got a degree in IT, but honestly, I don't feel very accomplished or skillful in the field; I just happen to be decent with computers and know how to use them. Apparently in my parents' eyes being able to build a computer and know how to navigate XP makes me some sort of weird computer paraiah.

Since September I've been working a part time job at a local tech firm doing a pretty basic data entry job, but it's a job meant for students. I've since graduated, and I was told in Februrary that I likely will not have this job in April or May. Well, it's April, almost May, so that time is coming closer. My parents have been really, really pushing me since summer last year to find a job, and when I lucked out and got this job... the pushing didn't stop. It then became "a fulltime 40 hour job with benefits."

The problem is, I've become jaded and cynical about how the working world works. I've developed a negative mindset that it's slave wage labor, and that it drains people and makes them unhappy with their lives. This mindset has made me absolutely terrified of getting a fulltime job. Starting out parttime was a huge challenge for me too, especially the first two months or so. Being offered the position via e-mail sent chills through me, and I almost didn't accept it, but I knew it was the smart thing to do. The first two months were somewhat of a clusterfuck with a slow boss, poor directions, but things have since stabalized and even though it's a boring job, it's easy, and I'm able to get through it 5 hours a day.

But now I'm hunting for fulltime work, and I just can't find anything, not even other parttime positions. I've only found about 3 or 4 openings since January, and I've applied to them all, and only one replied back to me for an interview. I had the interview, and was told that there would be a second interview to determine my skillsets and that the first inte
51 posts omitted. (View thread)
>> No. 76679
File 139030881477.jpg - (33.23KB , 635x430 , spoiler.jpg )
Well it IS an image board.

In any event, we're talking about jobs aren't we?

This image is supposedly real but the result of a mistake.
>> No. 77499
OP here,

It seems like the worst is about to happen. Since my current job is a temp job, I will likely be losing it in about 2 weeks. No concrete time has been set but they are looking for a student to potentially replace me. I was supposed to be replaced last March or April but I got lucky I guess. Still, no luck on alternative work either here at my current company or elsewhere. I'm at a loss. I don't know what to do.
>> No. 77544
Honestly OP, your biggest issue seems to be performance and social anxiety. You're afraid of the people you're working with, afraid of failing to meet expectations, and afraid that accepting the wrong job will transform you into a soulless wageslave straight out of shadowrun. Regardless of whether these fears are in any way legitimate, they are unhelpful. You need to conquer them to move forward.

Right now you're accepting a narrative for your life where you must submit yourself to authority figures, who will judge you and find you wanting. You want to get the interview over with as soon as possible because you feel that you have already been defeated and are just going through the motions. As a result, you project a sense of fear and defeatism.

You need to learn to divorce your actions from the emotional associations you have made, and write a narrative for your situation that makes you the victor, rather than the victim.

You aren't about to be cast adrift on the turbulent sea of unemployment, you're being released from a major distraction that's been getting in the way of you finding a fulfilling permanent position. Take this as an opportunity to focus on finding that position, while you're still living with your parents.

File 139373484519.jpg - (50.91KB , 702x510 , 1.jpg )
77452 No. 77452 [View]

Let me start off by defining what I mean by 'False Statistics'. These are Statistics that can be true, but are presented in a light that completely twists the statistic around until what it presents is actually false.

For example, I'm listening to a local news program that spoke about how leaders in the "Black Movie Community" (Why are we segregating things like this again?) feel that there aren't enough Black Movies being made and that the culture is twisted against them, pointing to the true statistic that predominately Black Movies don't bring in as much money as predominately White Movies.

This is what I mean by a false statistic. It is more likely that the predominantly Black Movies were simply not as entertaining and uninteresting compared to other movies. But instead it was twisted around to something else.

I just wanted to get that off my chest. I'm sure y'all have more examples on this or can expand on this case.
6 posts omitted. (Expand)
>> No. 77473
File 139386366112.png - (331.98KB , 828x544 , vlcsnap-2013-06-14-15h02m26s157.png )
Pyrite, the number of times I have gone from having a great time to rocking backward and forwards staring at the ceiling and wanting to cry within the space of an hour or two are unreal. And I'm not talking about teen angst, either. So I'd be even less sure if it had anything to do with the medication for me. But I've got my lows under a lot more control recently, so all is good!
>> No. 77475
File 139388942619.png - (162.92KB , 995x802 , 131042127893.png )
Maybe there is an interesting distinction that we can make here that involves a difference between two similar words, true, and real. Things can be real, but not true in a universal sense. These statistics are real as are many others that can be "used" or "misused". They are real because they are numbers that measure a definable aspect of reality to a defined level of precision. But the statistic is also true because the values of raw numbers themselves and the corresponding thing they are are measuring is the same for all observers.

But there is something here that will not be true to all observers. Truth is emotional value that we assign to the reasons that a person argues that the statistics should be paid attention to. So it's not the statistic itself that is true, it's the argument attached to the value of the statistic that is or is not true. Values are subjective. So they will be different from one person to another, and one group to another. Or they can change value as a situation changes around the things being measured (maybe it stops being important for the reasons or something else). Graham gives good reasons why some statistics can be of value to some groups, but not others, and Tamar gives similar reasons for why statistics can be problematic.

So I think that you are getting to something of value here that is important Mark, and it is something worth talking about. People do wave around statistics that will be true and accurate representations of a part of reality. What matters (and I could see this in your OP), is if the arguments given for the emotional value of the statistics match between different observers of the statistics. In other wards do people agree that the measured value is important? Not everyone will see statistics about Black movies the same way (I have not looked at these ones myself or the arguments in question).

Another question is do the numbers actually describe the cl
>> No. 77477
It was a long time ago, and there's nothing else I was on at the time. For all I know my symptoms were psychosomatic because I was told I might be depressed.

I'm not saying It should be pulled from the market or anything, just that it's probably a good thing that special care needs to be taken.

File 139350415446.jpg - (113.03KB , 625x714 , liberwha.jpg )
77433 No. 77433 [View]

Simple question.

Is Libertarianism a serious school of political thought, or is it only that there are people who treat it seriously? Implying it itself is not serious, but people take it seriously
10 posts omitted. (Expand)
>> No. 77461
File 139379715713.png - (37.30KB , 210x210 , 157 t.png )
>I think I have spotted a misunderstanding. The ideology itself is not serious, but people are about it.
Ah, no, that's not a misunderstanding, I miscommunicated. I meant to say the writers, philosophers, and economists who invented the main ideas of libertarianism. I'm not familiar with all of them, but as far as I know the libertarian canon was devised by serious people (e.g. Locke, Friedman, Rothbard, Rand) who took libertarian ideas seriously.

>. . . I can not call this a 'serious' school of economics, further I don't think history has backed up this assertion with enough evidence to suggest not only is it true, but likely to happen.
It looks like what you're saying is, "I think a school of economics is silly and believes silly things, therefore that school of economics must not be serious or take itself seriously".

But it could be that you considered libertarian economics seriously and concluded that it is stupid AND the libertarians who came up with libertarian economics considered it seriously and concluded that it is great.

>At least this was the goal in the comparison.
Your goal was to show that libertarianism doesn't take itself seriously by comparing it to an idea that almost nobody could take seriously, a car without a driver. But the fact that you think this is an apt metaphor does not imply that libertarians do. And if libertarians don't accept the metaphor then the metaphor says nothing about whether or not libertarianism is serious.
>> No. 77474
File 139387081368.png - (162.92KB , 995x802 , 131042127893.png )
>The ideology itself not being serious means it doesn't take itself or its application seriously I suppose.

Maybe because there is more than one type of person that gets into these philosophies. Or any philosophy or belief really.

*You have "true believers" that can be considered brainless thugs that are into a system of belief for social reasons. They think that they will get something out of it because they will get something if the group succeeds (even if unconsciously believed). they are definable by their inability to defend their beliefs and a bombastic over-the-top way of discussing what they believe and an inability to describe what their competitors believe (they essentially can't discuss things like socialism, or much else on it's own terms, just "catch phrases" or "stereotypes"). These exist on both "sides" of the political spectrum. There are reasons I dislike both Democrats and Republicans (as people that introduce themselves to me by their group, act like this and are not called out by their fellows).

*You have people that try to remain true to the philosophy in question (or as true as possible as possible). They agonize over the words of the folks that wrote the foundations of their beliefs and try to find places where the beliefs match up. The more serious of them are able to deal with things that the philosophical originators of their beliefs did not envision being problems, but for Libertarianism (and many others) I have not been satisfied on that account. But this is a complaint of many philosophies. Taking into account things that are not part of the philosophy (that usually involve issues of neglected aspects of human nature that create other flaws). This is a common problem with many philosophies because as as long as neurobiology, sociology, and psychology are incomplete, there will be little to slap onto one's favorite philosophy to fix it.
>> No. 77476
I guess I should have added, have you talked to people that are in the second group? Or at least seemed to be in that group?

Delete post []
Report post

[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]