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 139309497674.jpg - (60.57KB , 540x632 , 179018_4948728194239_1982587312_n.jpg )
77340 No. 77340 [View]

Could it be possible that....

Could it be possible that, in a group of people all socializing and interacting and otherwise 'being normal', there would be significantly more sexual tension, energy, repression, and more sexualization in a group where everyone had their clothes on than in a comparable group of 'naturalists' or nudists. Or, in other words, just naked people being naked together like anyone else is, only without the clothes.

I suspect that the group of naked people being naked together experiences drastically lower importance on things related to sex, attractiveness, sexuality, preoccupation with self body image etc than does a comparable group of people who keep their clothes on.
9 posts omitted. (Expand)
>> No. 77357
I don't understand the connection people are drawing between nudism and acceptance of body types.

Clothing makes the bodies of people with different body types look more similar than if they were naked, not less similar. It also allows for all sorts of social signalling that can offset the signalling of one's physical body. If nobody wore clothing I would expect more judgment of people by their body, not less.

It's also not clear to me that this should be a desirable goal. Some bodies are better than others. Better looking, more fit, healthier. In general, things that are better ought to be promoted. Present society has problems. I think it places too much importance on people's bodies, and judgment is not perfectly calibrated e.g. IIRC the healthiest body weight is slightly overweight according to standard scales. But aiming for the exact opposite - a society where all bodies are accepted completely equally - looks to me like an attempt to arrive at a good system by simply reversing a bad one.
>> No. 77371
Well let me try to shore up some edges here.

1) We should be able to measure how nudists/naturalists perceive body type as it pertains to other, self, and group and how it differs from 'clothing mandatory' peoples by giving them small surveys about their perceptions.

2) If nakedness/exposure to it 'works' to change people's images of body type for the better, there should be some research (or at least evidence of use) regarding this as a therapy. Further we should probably find this prevalent change in places where people are exposed to unusual amounts of nudity in a regular setting - say maybe an art class and its nude models.

I'm pretty sure number 2 already exists and is used in therapy for couples as I've seen on mentioned on a blog, but it was not given a label or explained so I'm currently at a loss trying to find the right keywords to unearth this type of body image couples therapy.

>Ritualized sort of means doing it in a schedule, though.
I think this has traditionally been the model in human societies that practice orgiastic sex. Lunar or seasonal.
>> No. 77374
File 139334816414.jpg - (113.22KB , 900x597 , summertime_fillies_by_johnjoseco-d3leaqr.jpg )
>This isn't precisely how we treat the exposure of the body? As if it were something shameful to expose? Perhaps humans really aren't born ashamed of their bodies but are taught to be so. I think it seems clearly obvious we treat bodies as something of shame when exposed to us in the overwhelmingly vast majority of imagined scenarios.
But Graham, I gave my opinion of the notion that we see unclothed bodies as "shameful". I hope you don't mind if I copypaste it from above:

>What does this mean, "ashamed of your body"? If you're ashamed of something, that generally means you consider it in a negative way and you would rather no one else knew about it. But that's not the case for nakedness, in my opinion. For some people, perhaps, but not for everybody. Shame is not the only reason for hiding something away. That's the sort of logic that the NSA use to justify searching through your internet history - "If you've got nothing to be ashamed of, you've got nothing to hide". If you've got nothing to be ashamed of, then you can still have something to hide. When we keep secrets, it's not always because we're ashamed of them. They're private, for our own reasons.

It may be embarrassing to have your pants fall down in public, but that need not inherently be because you are ashamed of your body. I am not ashamed of my body, I'm happy with it. And if my pants fell down in public I'd be very embarrassed and I'd try to hide myself. But this is not because I dislike myself. This is because I dislike other people being able to see my genitals against my will. And the reason my will is opposed to other people seeing my genitals is the same reason I wouldn't want people to see the inner turnings of my mind. It's me, it

File 139266853564.jpg - (96.88KB , 949x650 , Artist-Siansaar ''Caught a Cold'' Epic.jpg )
77298 No. 77298 [View]

I was reading about anxiety. On an NHS page I read that the following three things contribute to anxiety - Caffeine, Smoking, and Alcohol. Oh dear, I indulge in all three of those quite a lot! I'm not addicted to any of them but I'm certainly a happy and regular consumer of all three.


I'm going to have a week-long 'detox', because I feel that I have had increasing problems with anxiety lately. And while I'm at it, I thought I might as well throw Facebook into the bag as well. So: no Facebook, no cigarettes/mini cigars, no drink, and no tea, coffee, coke or other caffeinated drink. Since I'm English, tea will probably be the hardest one to let go of.

I thought I'd make this thread for two reasons - firstly to have a bit of accountability, and secondly because the results at the end of the week might be interesting for you guys. It might turn out to be an awful idea, or it might leave me feeling very healthy and nice. I'll try to eat healthily and get fresh air too, but nothing too special.

Wish me luck! Feel free to ask me anything, discuss your thoughts or anything related to the topic in the thread.
11 posts omitted. (Expand)
>> No. 77360
File 139325699999.png - (1.26MB , 1094x1200 , Octavia.png )
I feel that this supports what I am thinking. Facebook feeds off and intensifies our insecurity. It encourages to post pictures and status updates that make us look awesome and cool - stroking our ego. But it's shallow boasting, and it doesn't last. Furthermore, it's a pretty desperate zone where everyone is in subconscious competition, comparing ourselves with everyone else - that person has more friends than me, that person has more awesome pictures than me, that person just went on a date with their boyfriend, that person just posted a witty status and got fifty likes. And here I am browsing tumblr in the bathroom. I suck.

>Seeking happiness itself does not work so well because happiness is a reward signal that does not last. Rather we get happiness from other things and contentment is a better target.
I've been there before, actually. Last winter (it always seems to be winter) when I thought I was having problems with depression, I expended a lot of psychological effort in trying to work out how to be happy. Eventually I realised that that was very damaging, because the more I thought about how to be happy, the more I thought about how I wasn't happy, and therefore the more unhappy I became. I overcooked it. So I made a resolution to stop striving for happiness, and instead make wisdom my day-to-day goal - to be wise and sensible, instead of a hedonistic happiness-seeker. In the end it has made me happier; just relaxing and thinking less about the whole thing has made me quite a lot happier overall.

This is how my anxiety manifests itself now. When I get anxious, I forget everything I've learned about how to relax (strangely I'm reminded of Twilight learning how to relax from Cadence in the Crystal Empire, but that's not really relevant) and I suddenly panic and think "Oh no! I'd for
>> No. 77368
File 139327862828.png - (25.85KB , 150x144 , request___egghead_twi___by_richhap-d4k3wrw.png )
I have always wondered at just how much nicotine you absorb that way. It might be inconsequential. You may yet see effects with avoiding the smoking and alcohol over time. If you want I can look up and see what the time scales are when it comes to tobacco and alcohol effects (tobacco vs. just nicotine involves lots of chemicals).

That facebook one is interesting to me. I think that is an effect that I am immune to (ADHD and Tourette's come with social process alterations so this has me curious on a deeper level, I have always been rather asocial which has considerable drawbacks). Or maybe I just have different habits and I avoid it. This does not make us a better or worse than one another, these social information systems are important that there are times that I am envious of the connections that people seem to value that I never get enjoyment out of so it's a double edged sword. But facebook does seem to manifest these social information instincts in ways that can be pathological. Disconnecting for now is fine, but maybe there is a way to use facebook without the toxic levels of interpersonal comparison? If not the old ways are still fine.

Caffeine. Yeah. I finally talked to a psychologist for the first time and he persuaded me to reduce the caffeine (I cut it in half). Given the effect I think it's safe to assume that the opposite of anxiety is irritability. Fascinating but annoying. Did you have that experience as well? I get the impression that anxiety is a symptom of something else, and when the something else is dealt with the caffeine can come back because the stimulation that causes the shift in awareness that makes the anxiety worse will no longer be an issue. If that is true the caffeine acts to make the signal stand out in our minds stronger, it's just that to deal with the source effectively we need to reduce the signal.

Maybe. People are still individually unique in how we process emotions within a still poorly understood general frame so it's possible that some folks would jus
>> No. 77370
File 139331414525.jpg - (77.89KB , 825x825 , 66838 - confound_these_ponies duplicate hit_the_sauce twilight_sparkle.jpg )
>Given the effect I think it's safe to assume that the opposite of anxiety is irritability.
I think, like a smoker trying to quit smoking, a coffee drinker trying to quit coffee will become very irritable in the short run. Caffeine introduces a certain amount of focus and clarity to the head, and when a heavy coffee drinker gives that up the mess of unfocussed thoughts is very irritating and leaves that person with a short temper. But, like smoking, I think it's an illusion - you know how a smoker with cigarettes is calm, a smoker without cigarettes is irritated, but a non-smoker is the calmest of them all? I think it's the same without caffeine. Drinking caffeine makes the mind lazy when it comes to focusing on a task and not dreaming about other things. So getting used to focusing without it takes time and until you get good at it again you are irritable and badly focused. This is disappointing news for me because I'm in the last few months of my undergraduate degree and I'm not sure I can afford to train myself through all that. I might save kicking the habit until after then.

As for Facebook, I am aware of its uses, and I'm quite pleased by them. Messaging, networking, finding out about social events. But for someone with issues of insecurity, like me, it can be a dangerous place for the reasons I've set out above. But I think I have found a happy medium of self-disciplined use. No idle browsing.

Agh, anxiety ... I used to think I had depression and now I think I have anxiety. It's a rollercoaster ride. But I can handle the idea of anxiety better than depression. And I do feel better than I used to. I don't feel so totally hopeless and worthless now, I just feel like I worry about everything too much. Which is good, right? Because it means I know that the reality is not as bad as I'm making it out to be. And I just need to learn the self-discipline to control my worrying.

File 139180254448.png - (302.86KB , 622x544 , vlcsnap-2013-06-13-22h34m54s86.png )
77182 No. 77182 [View]

Modern society seems to be so much more full of people with depression, anxiety and unhappiness than it used to be. Why is this?

A) Was this always the case, only now everybody feels more able to talk about it, due to the liberalisation of society and de-stigmatisation of emotions?

B) Has it been caused by social media and the internet? There seems to be significant evidence for Facebook etcetera causing loneliness and isolation, though I can't quote any.

C) Is it caused by features of modern society separate to social media and the internet? Is it just because everybody is so bored because they don't have to go hunting for their food or fight off bandits that they get depressed?

D) Is it an illusion, and really nothing has changed, but since we can communicate with far more people through the internet it just seems to be more of an issue?

E) Is modern society full of yellow-bellied cowards who need to man the f*** up?
24 posts omitted. (View thread)
>> No. 77330
File 139293120276.png - (94.89KB , 764x756 , 131043084513.png )
Hi Tamar. Sorry I did not respond for a bit. I'm battling my own demons.
>I think, to be honest, another and more local reason is really the state of my country at the moment. There is a sense of long term hopelessness for Britain's youth at the moment. Not drastically, mind you - this is more the hopeless ennui that hits the kids of a rich businessman than the real despair of the kids of a broken, bankrupt and sick dad - but the fact remains that it really sucks to be young in Britain. Every student graduates and starts on the job ladder with a catastrophic amount of debt on their shoulders - a report just published has suggested that an estimate by the government that 60% of students will ever be able to pay their student loan back is optimistic - and to rub salt into the wound, the job market is competitive, limited and difficult. Employers want experience, extra qualifications, the X Factor.
The US is likely approaching similar straits. There is some huge structural problem in play that it seems no one can quite agree on. Tons of people choose to go to college and take on that debt for a great many reasons. But the fact of the matter is that for many there will be no job to use that degree with, or the job will not be profitable enough to recover from the debt. Since it is an employer's market the aggregate path that human behavior tends to take makes the deal less and less valuable for the next set of job seekers. Something has to give somewhere. As an older nation I wonder if you are on an early path in a cyclic pattern we discussed a little while ago.

>Consequently, life for the student is locked between two extremes. Firstly, a desperate hedonism of live-while-you-can before you get thrust into the awfulness of young adulthood where you are neither trusted nor particularly wanted except for your potential to grow old with the company and make them money - and secondly, a manic rush to get
>> No. 77361
File 139325735623.png - (218.75KB , 812x542 , 41464 - artist NavitasErusSirus artist Nullh colored socks twilight_sparkle.png )
The two discussions dovetail...
>> No. 77367
Yes they do. I often find things that are applicable to multiple things that I see around here and I try to post the most useful things that I find.

I was thinking about something else you said. I don't know if it's related but feel free to tell me if I'm wrong.
>I think, to be honest, another and more local reason is really the state of my country at the moment. There is a sense of long term hopelessness for Britain's youth at the moment. Not drastically, mind you - this is more the hopeless ennui that hits the kids of a rich businessman than the real despair of the kids of a broken, bankrupt and sick dad - but the fact remains that it really sucks to be young in Britain.

I have no idea if it fits but when I made my original reply I was too hasty with how I characterized narratives. I actually have a lot of respect for narratives. When you take a really broad look at mythology and history it's obvious that a unifying narrative, a story that unites a group and gives each of the individuals a place in that group, is very very important to us. I get the feeling that in many cultures we have lost our collective narrative. The "story of a people" serves lots of functions including to keep different individuals at different levels of the society unified in a way that creates empathy and keeps us moving as a group in a way where we don't step on each other and lots of other benefits that give people direction in a larger context.

For me when I feel that sort of hopeless ennui you describe it feels like a big loss of connections everywhere. Connections that we fell should be there but are not and at least give us a guidance that prevents us from individually flying into extreme directions to make sense of what we are trying to do right now. Our current narratives seem to be failing us for one reason

File 139281586494.jpg - (124.08KB , 720x632 , tarttoter.jpg )
77325 No. 77325 [View]

How will we manage to understand or adequately respond to important messages or ideas from higher/alien intelligences than ours that we just can't grasp?
If you want a real life example of this happening, check this out.

In this instance, a computer has solved something called the "Erdős discrepancy"
I have no idea what is going on in this maths
However the solution it provided is essentially so monumentally long, that its beyond comprehension. This poses to us one scenario which a 'super' intelligence has attempted to provide something in a format that is too bulky and complicated for us to grasp.

What kind of other bottlenecks might we experience in communication with intelligence that has ideas or messages we aren't capable of readily consuming?

Last edited at Wed, Feb 19th, 2014 06:18

>> No. 77335
Well I wondered if this one wasn't a bit too 'out there' to garner responses.

I'll try to beat a path through the dense undergrowth of wtfness.

>How will we manage to understand or adequately respond to important messages or ideas from higher/alien intelligences than ours that we just can't grasp?
>What kind of other bottlenecks might we experience in communication with intelligence that has ideas or messages we aren't capable of readily consuming?

There seems to be a big fork in the road here between 'do we play it off and try to study the message?' or 'do we admit we can't readily absorb this and need it simplified or translated if possible'. It seems to me we would be much more inclined to do the former than the latter - and there is a bit of danger in that. If a superior intelligence realizes we lack mental capacity to grasp what it just communicated, this could be a devestating weakness we've just exposed.

However on the alternative, not telling it when we don't understand could be an even bigger mistake.

>other bottlenecks
>> No. 77339
>What kind of other bottlenecks might we experience in communication with intelligence that has ideas or messages we aren't capable of readily consuming?
I can think of only one other bottleneck - possibly more like a bottle cork, really.

It could be that our ability to reason is broken on a fundamental level.

The foundations of human thought are a set of basic, built-in metaphorical and physical relations. We believe that reality is not more than one particular way at a time, we believe that if object a is bigger than object b and object b is bigger than object c, then object a is bigger than object c. Basic logic and other very simple ways of understanding what we encounter in the world are wired into our brains. This can actually be verified by observing how babies react to impossible scenarios produced by clever illusions.

Maybe most importantly, human minds have Occamian and Laplacian priors: we believe that simpler theories are more likely to be correct and that the more often something happens, the more likely it is to happen again.

To any human reading this, the above seems like just true stuff that couldn't possibly be questioned, but that's just what it feels like to be a mind that has those foundations wired in. Consider what would happen if you encountered a person with anti-Occamian and anti-Laplacian priors i.e. they believe that complex theories are more likely to be correct and the more often something happens, the less likely it is to happen again. Each day they would see the Sun rise and be more convinced that it would not rise the following day. If you explained the science of why the Sun will definitely rise again, they would reject it on the grounds that science and its justifications are simple and have worked well in the past. If you asked them why they keep using those foundations of thought which are clearly faulty, they'd tell you they use them because they've always been wrong before!

File 139282241137.gif - (8.46KB , 312x256 , felondisenfranchisement.gif )
77326 No. 77326 [View]

Should convicted felons be allowed to/be disallowed to vote?

Should people in jail or in prison?
1 post omitted. (Expand)
>> No. 77328
File 139289652604.jpg - (22.59KB , 361x486 , eric-holder1.jpg )
So would you say some felonies, yes you should have your right to vote revoked?

What kind of comparison can you draw between whatever it is you're thinking is subjective based on the exact felony, and how felons/convicted criminals are currently disenfranchised?
>> No. 77332
File 139293177149.png - (207.80KB , 782x1022 , 130932998007.png )
I would say that convicted felons should be given the right to vote. Our "justice system" does not really deserve that label and we have a long way to go to go before our society is willing to do what is necessary to emphasize rehabilitation. Giving people with experience in the criminal justice system the right to vote could be a good step in that direction because they would then be constituents that politicians would have to take into account.

Also people that do want to fix our justice system often have to strategically deal with irrational paranoia among voters that comes from use of the whole "soft on crime" meme that is useful too often. This new group of voters would not be sensitive to this meme.

Additionally giving them the right to vote would make them more of a part of the system which would perhaps make them more engaged which could help reduce recidivism. But I'm not really sure about that one, it just popped into my head.
>> No. 77333
My apologies. I'll spell it out.

I feel it is an overly broad punishment, especially for something we consider fundamental to the health of a democracy. I would also say that I do not see what one thing (felon status) has to do with the other (voting rights).

File 139249896851.png - (5.43MB , 2969x2692 , pony_university_by_dronian-d49aqo9.png )
77281 No. 77281 [View]

Why is tuition so expensive?

This is a question that has been plaguing youths of developed nations more and more as the 20th and 21st centuries have advanced. As nations like the United States become more developed, that is becoming a nation where Service Sectors produce more wealth than Industrial Sectors, colleges and universities have become almost universally required to enter a field that is growing. As such, more and more people have meet the wall that is tuition costs and have either driven themselves into a bottomless pit of debt or have cast aside their own desires to pursue a less demanding path. But why? Why are these costs so high?

Many have attempted to point fingers at who to blame. Students for being so foolish as to drive themselves into debt. Banks for giving out loans to those students. Government for not giving enough assistance. But these are not the sources of the problem, in my opinion. Simply a means to shift the blame away from the true cause.

The Universities and Colleges themselves.

When the University was first built, it was done so under the umbrella of the Christian Church, mainly what would become the Catholic Branch. As such Universities had very low costs because not only where they all interconnected branches of the same whole and thus had no reason to compete against one another, but because they were not charged with Taxes, nor were they demanded to pay for many things as the Church supported them. At the time, the common requirement was to acquire a Sponsor to give you one of the seats that the University gave to him. The Crown, the Church or a family of wealth could have easily sufficed and most would just require proof that you had the will and capability to learn. And this system worked for a nation that was mainly agricultural. The number of students that would seek to educate themselves would be very low as there was simply no desire or place for them. But over the 200 years of the existence of the United States, we have quickly evolved from an Agricultural nation, to an Industrial nation to now a "Service Nation". (I will use the term Techno
>> No. 77282
I usually look to compare models as one of my first steps.

>> No. 77310
File 139272308295.png - (132.70KB , 491x339 , tuitionvssalary.png )
Well, let's think about the economics.

Universities are businesses. Administrators want to suck as much money out of students as possible, in no small part so that they can afford their bloated salaries.

Whether it's true or not, there are plenty of students with money who believe that the education offered is worth the high tuition.

There is little competition since prestige requirements, accreditation requirements, etc. lock small schools and newcomers out of the education market. It's also pretty obvious that the top universities and their administrators are connected to each other and act together to hold a monopoly on the business.

File 139258239950.jpg - (354.70KB , 1080x1200 , image.jpg )
77283 No. 77283 [View]

Hypothetically speaking lets say you are leaving a party and you arive all the way home . As you are about to leave your car you look back and see a person of the opposite gender passed in the back seat.

You can tell they're from the party because they reek of booze. Also you remember seeing them at the party. Upon further investigation you can tell they soiled themselves and sadly your car. Angrily you shake them and you get no response. Being the Good Samaritan you are you bring them inside.

Here's you dilemma : You want to let them sleep but if they go to sleep on your couch they will get the couch dirt no to mention they will be in their own filth .

What do you do?
7 posts omitted. (Expand)
>> No. 77295
File 139266233632.png - (42.70KB , 412x368 , rule breakers2.png )
You can touch them, for sure, I meant more it would be illegal to wash them when they're passed out. Anything that goes beyond your due diligence is shaky territory, especially if the victim could perceive sexual intent (even if it's not there)
>> No. 77301
File 139267606316.png - (357.13KB , 948x550 , 550955__safe_rainbow+dash_applejack_shipping_lesbian_blushing_pixiv_snow_appledash_banana.png )
Seems reasonable. But unless it's someone I'm particularly close to - and I mean particularly close - my responsibility is to make sure they don't kill themselves and don't make a mess everywhere, and that's it. So no chance of me getting arrested for undressing and washing some soiled drunk ...
>> No. 77307
File 139269076407.png - (59.16KB , 341x522 , tumblr_m1xmanoZoq1rs2sgmo2_400.png )
Oh I'm with you on that one, buddy! It's way, way overkill and disrespectful to who-ever-it-is that's passed out!
Anyway step one is phone the ambulance if someone is passed out and not responding to external stimuli anyway.

Would anyone even know the steps on what to do if someone stops breathing while passed out? What to do if they start choking on their vomit? It's a tough place to be in and, if the worst case scenario does happen and you went outside your training or neglected to do something you should have you're can be totally responsible. The "good Samaritan act" can only go so far!

File 139163334445.jpg - (259.93KB , 1050x691 , nihms310276f2.jpg )
77145 No. 77145 [View]

I have not been very active over the last several months.

The reason has been that I have been facing the reality of emotional limitations that come with life stress. It's been simultaneously fascinating and torturous. Fascinating because like I usually do I have run to brain and behavior science to try to explain why I have had to do what I have been doing, but torturous because finding solutions has been a different matter. Also stabbing anxiety. This is the kind of thing every person can go through so I thought I could make this a new post while I try to get more active around here.

Anxiety is a interesting emotion. It's like pain and actually shares some of the neurobiological wiring of the pain system. But where pain is damage to your body, anxiety seems to be damage to your world. If your body is in pain something is not working right and you are supposed to be careful with your body and make sure you don't make the injury worse, and take care of things so they can heal.
When your world is damaged you still feel the injury and your body tries to get you to "be careful" but in different ways. So situational anxiety has been a new thing for me to think about and I can actually feel my anxiety level tick up and down in different situations like an annoying set of weights getting added and taken off.

Basically what I think I have been forming:
1) An awareness of the different contributing factors to mental stress.
2) An awareness of the additive effects of the stress in different environments.
3) An awareness of my mental limitations during different mental stress states.
7 posts omitted. (Expand)
>> No. 77203
>How do we 'solve' several of these listed/diagram'd things which are unsatisfactory for you at this time all at once?

Solving will require repairing the damage to my world which results in the awareness of vulnerability that produces the anxiety. Which will require getting a job and until that happens I'm looking into ways of ignoring, or other ways of dealing with the anxiety. Suppressing won't work because that apparently gets associated with more anxiety.
I finally got a prescription for the adderall so now that I have my brain crutches back I can start dealing with the ADHD in more functional ways. My #1 should improve and that is the most pervasive source for the anxiety I'm feeling (I still need to structure things in my life to deal with the ADHD better though).

>I'm thinking a more holistic approach to your situation is going to be the most effective, and if that can be done efficiently by combining several needs/wants/expectations unmet or constantly being fretted over then you should have easy and viable solutions.
>Many of these things are quite interconnected, and achieving some progress in one will net you more progress in other areas.

Something like anxiety is pervasive in its effects so dealing with it would probably have to take place at more than one level. It taxes ones mental reserves and puts a negative cast over everything. It takes an effort to keep from being overly negative and letting the anxiety alter my responses (I already have enough emotional precision issues because of the tourette's) while frustrated or any other negative emotional moment. It's like having a computer with a bunch of the ram taken up by spyware running in the background.

>> No. 77214
>I'm a bit fluid with the concept of "meditation" so Graham and I have used the term outside of more traditional meanings in other conversations.
Certainly fair.

I only have read just the begining on the thread on meditation, I've been meaning to read it at some point, it seems interestig, but keep forgetting. Heh, only on /dis/ can you do that.

>I'm interested in how the more traditional practices are described though. How would you describe the thing I am talking about with the candle
That would be a meditation proper in the original context.
I wish I could find my notes from the monastery, we spent a whole week on just various techniques for dealing with agitations preventing meditation, and went into quite a bit of detail.

You probably already know how you're not supposed to attempt to stop thoughts from occuring, you're supposed to let them arise and pass without clinging to them until they stop coming. I remember when I finally got it, I would go for a minute or two and then repetedly have thoughts like 'Hey! I just thought of nothing! I'm finally actually meditating now! Oops, wait, no, that was a thought!' and have to go through the whole thing again until that time period woule extend longer and longer.
>> No. 77287
Well I have another functional explanation for things.

Anxiety, depression and other negative memory states do reduce short-term memory and working memory. Things I already have less of thanks to the ADHD. At least that explains some more things :P

I finally have a psychologist that I will start seeing next week. If they give me some tips on functional ways of dealing with it that I can turn into something more universally useful I'll post it here. I just wish it was not like the stars had to be aligned and other seemingly random things that give me a day where I seem to have the mental space to be more functional.

I'm still getting used to the adderall again so hopefully in the weeks to come things will change.

Last edited at Sun, Feb 16th, 2014 15:14

File 139208069782.jpg - (182.29KB , 1207x802 , Cortona_Rape_of_the_Sabine_Women_01.jpg )
77238 No. 77238 [View]
To what degree are the negative psychological effects of rape socially constructed?

Yeah, this was originally going to be a troll thread, but on reflection, it's actually a legitimately interesting topic. Let's consider a less emotional crime, say theft. If someone takes an item of value out of your backpack and tells you that you're never going to see it again, you'd feel kinda violated, right? Well, what if the purloiner was a TSA agent acting in his official capacity? You'd still be pissed, but wouldn't feel as violated, right?

Now consider a society in which certain high-ranking officials are, by custom and law, allowed to rape certain other persons in certain circumstances, e.g., the probably-apocryphal jus primae noctis of certain medieval jurisdictions. Would that type of rape be less psychologically damaging?
14 posts omitted. (Expand)
>> No. 77270
Rape and murder are violations of personhood, and both are crimes that do damage to something that cannot be replaced. In both cases, the revenge instinct is largely I think an overcompensation for our failure to protect, rather than a rational solution to the problem.

Last edited at Fri, Feb 14th, 2014 17:33

>> No. 77271
File 139242825066.png - (148.90KB , 376x400 , ohh you.png )
Why don't we feel the same about general violence then, though?
>> No. 77277
'general violence' is random in the damage it causes, but I expect that people would feel similarly if someone were intentionally and deliberately crippled.

File 139182786480.png - (153.39KB , 400x250 , 33434444.png )
77190 No. 77190 [View]

One "Edward Slingerland" writes of a concept he feels needs to be retired.

of "Scientific Morality"

Impressed by the growing explanatory power of the natural sciences of his time, the philosopher David Hume called upon his colleagues to abandon the armchair, turn their attention to empirical evidence, and "hearken to no arguments but those which are derived from experience… reject every system of ethics, however subtle or ingenious, which is not founded on fact and observation." This was over two hundred years ago, and unfortunately not much changed in academic philosophy until about the last decade or two. Pushing past a barrier also associated with Hume—the infamous is-ought or fact-value distinction—a growing number of philosophers have finally begun arguing that our theories should be informed by our best current empirical accounts of how the human minds works, and that an ethical system that posits or requires an impossible psychology should be treated with suspicion.

One of the more robust and relevant bits of knowledge about human psychology that has emerged from the cognitive sciences is that we are not rational minds housed in irrational, emotional bodies. Metaphors like that of Plato's rational charioteer bravely struggling to control his irrational, passionate horses appeal to us because they map well onto our intuitive psychology, but they turn out to be ultimately misleading. A more empirically accurate image would be that of a centaur: rider and horse are one. To the best of our knowledge, there is no ghost in the machine. We are thoroughly embodied creatures, embedded in a complex social and culturally-shaped environment, primarily guided in our daily lives not by cold calculation but hot emotion; not conscious choice but automatic, spontaneous processes; not rational concepts descended from the realm of Forms but rather modal, analogical images.

So, the ironic result of adopting a scientific s
1 post omitted. (Expand)
>> No. 77239
I did it because I was otherwise going to use > but then I'd have to go down the entire thing line by line so I just spoilered it.

>it seems really rambling.

Yeah but the jist of it is still there. 'Scientific Morality' is a dead horse we should really stop beating, if not at least think about what we're doing when we try to come up with a 'scientific morality'.

I had to read it over a couple of times to feel like I was getting his message.
>> No. 77240
Whether our minds are properly set up to process things rationally is kind of irrelevant, honestly. It should be self-apparent that logic cannot tell us why we should do things, only how to do them more effectively and efficiently. Our end goals can only be derived from emotional attachments.
>> No. 77248
I read the "Moral Landscape" by Sam Harris recently.
He defined morality to be synonymous with human well-being.
He made pretty good case and has addressed most of these concerns.
You might want to read it.

Last edited at Wed, Feb 12th, 2014 07:24

File 139193140889.jpg - (4.61MB , 4320x3240 , 2.jpg )
77205 No. 77205 [View]
I haven't been on this site in awhile.
I left because at one point, I felt I was in a place where my beliefs were looked down upon, and, had no chance to be properly discussed.

This isn't about that though. I came because I could just say everything that I have bottled up, and won't be verbally violated.

I am an unhappy person. I would like to blame everyone but myself, but I know deep down that it's all on me. I can't control myself, the most regular part of my day is taking a shower, same time, every day for the past two years. Other than that I keep digging a hole. I barely accomplish anything in school anymore and I am starting to hate everyone that I know. My only solid abilities are creativity and I know what little value that has these days. I want all sorts of things I can't have or just won't ever posses because of my loathing. I am judged for the way I look, and regret ever doing anything out of the norm, as I live in a religious farming community. The only reason I continue anything I do is so others don't come to bother me. My parents have been blamed for my actions (or lack thereof) and although I can say it was their fault, I can't seem to change. I have one attempted suicide and regularly scrape skin off of my arm in a nervous manner. The only person I thought had a true caring side for me is turning into a nightmare. They and their family ridicule me in public, and I'm constantly made out to be a joke in my school as fallout from this. I started having different thought patterns after I was put on anti-depression medications. The singular person I have had true feelings for doesn't share them, yet still wants to be my friend. it's some of the worst emotional riff raff I deal with on a day to day basis. I feel like all of what people know me for is the role that I play, and I don't talk to others about myself because they just don't understand. Sometimes my morose mood can turn into a slow boiling rage, and I think of hurting others because they are simply present, but I haven't done anything violent yet. I am finishing school this year and barely comprehend mathematics. I have lost interest in
2 posts omitted. (Expand)
>> No. 77229
Can we ask in what creative field your talent lies?
>> No. 77231
I'm artistic. I can draw well, paint, work with junk, sculptures, clothing, all sorts of things.
>> No. 77237
File 139205316300.png - (162.92KB , 995x802 , 131042127893.png )
Hi anon. I can't promise that you won't get criticism here. Criticism is allowed (though I wish it was always constructive), but abuse is not. I don't take kindly to abuse on this board.

But I am a big believer in the idea that for anyone to really deal with their problems, they need a community of some kind to talk about those problems with. You have to get them out of your head and make objects out of them that become solid unchanging things or things that you can make more accurate after thought that you can connect to other thoughts instead of just think about. Journals can work, but we evolved to screech at our fellow monkeys and that method is probably best.

>I am an unhappy person. I would like to blame everyone but myself, but I know deep down that it's all on me. I can't control myself, the most regular part of my day is taking a shower, same time, every day for the past two years. Other than that I keep digging a hole. I barely accomplish anything in school anymore and I am starting to hate everyone that I know.
You are unhappy about a pattern. That is a good start. You have something to analyze. However saying it is only you would not be wise. Most of the time these things involve more than one person, but yes there will be elements that you are responsible for.

>My only solid abilities are creativity and I know what little value that has these days. I want all sorts of things I can't have or just won't ever posses because of my loathing.
A common flaw in creative people is focusing that creativity in an organized way. Creative people can make lots of connections between things and that requires an element of category breaking (among other things). Unfortunately that very ability to see past the things that exist and create things that don't yet exis

File 139203479251.jpg - (118.60KB , 820x662 , Tr-bigstick-cartoon.jpg )
77235 No. 77235 [View]

Smedley Butler writes, in his book "War is a Racket"

>I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.

What do we have to learn from the Banana Wars?

File 138822560575.jpg - (62.99KB , 612x816 , 1098218_415722021879522_1185727688_n.jpg )
76512 No. 76512 [View]

I think we might be able to save the world with food.

It sounds kind of silly, but if you think about some of the problems that plague us today as a species - and the world around us, quite a lot of them are fueled by our quite changed relationship with food.

But, this is only thinking about how our sustenance relates to problems - what if we applied food as the solution? Its such an incredibly flexible platform to work from, and the market and need and ability to apply solutions with food exists everywhere we do.

I think its possible we could actually eat our way to a better tomorrow. Maybe not even only possible, but... it just sounds really easy when put that way, doesn't it? Eat your way to a better existence. I am still thinking about how this might work, but here are a few key points that give this idea some leverage I feel.

'Food' is something we need every day to survive. Everyone consumes this, constantly - lets direct this consumption in intelligent, focused, and efficient ways to make changes in the world by directing consumer dollars with two main goals in mind: to purchase food as close to its raw form as possible, and to the best practices possible in that local economy and environment.

This means removing as many 'middle men' and food processing steps as possible and by directly linking into local economies instead of transnational corporate accounts.
20 posts omitted. (View thread)
>> No. 77232
>Your system comes up short in the first day.

I really don't know how many more times or how much better i can say this, but I am not proposing an either-or I am proposing a both-and.

Even still, saving 15% on food costs per week is notable. 15% per window.

thats a pretty big asset if you have even a few windows

Last edited at Sun, Feb 9th, 2014 15:50

>> No. 77233
So how are you going to convince people to turn their windows into a mini-farm?

And I don't mean just apartments, the window count also included businesses. How would you convince them?
>> No. 77234
People are already doing it, if there were enough monetary incentive for doing so, it could be turned into a kind of welfare program - grow food, get enough money for rent and to subsist.

should be easier as a nonprofit, so taxes aren't a big drag on it

File 139189922641.png - (1.26MB , 809x703 , 1391890824922.png )
77198 No. 77198 [View]

Hey, guys. Just thought I'd pop in and see how the oldfriends are doing.

Not sure why I decided to pop in, but whatever. Yes I know this isn't /chat/ but the community isn't the same over there
2 posts omitted. (Expand)
>> No. 77202
File 139192148022.png - (101.46KB , 668x380 , shake.png )
Oh hey, boredhooman. How's it going?

(What is your story called? :3)
>> No. 77228
Going good. Nothing really exciting happening.

"A New World, A New Threat". I use my trip as my name on FimFiction
>> No. 77230
File 139198214795.png - (662.97KB , 900x941 , 130963020735.png )
Hi boredhooman! Nice to see you are still kicking around.

File 139016238268.jpg - (132.57KB , 1026x918 , Middle_East_geographic.jpg )
76662 No. 76662 [View]
Okay, so we can all agree that stable democracies is a bit absent in the middle east sans Turkey, Israel, and kind sorta Iran (they vote but the choices are all picked before hand). Why is this?
Other democracies such as Iraq and Afghanistan is on the verge of a civil war or at the very least unstable.
Other countries in the Middle East such as Saudi Arabia and Oman are an outright monarchy.
With this some may wonder how Democracy can spring up in Middle East.
I have a hypothesis if you will indulge me.
Iran is our best chance at creating a stable, Islamic (as in demographics), secular democracy.
My reasoning is thus:
Iran is a stable country and more than that, it has an educated middle class with educated men and women who know they can have a better life and who don't have the same steam that propelled the Islamic revolution that overthrew the Shah all those years ago.
They already have a good structure for democracy, all they would have to do is reduce the Ayatollah to a religious figure with no temporal power, just spiritual. The Guardian Council would also have to go, as they choose who runs, this runs contrary to a democracy (as we know it here in the west).
If they take care of those two factors it would take much at all for them to be a stable democracy at all.
They are also Shia Muslims, no Sunni. Why is this important? Sharia law is a Sunni concept, not Shia, thus you will not have a great number of people arguing for it's inclusion into the law.
What do you people think? Does Iran have the best chance at being a democracy? Or would a nation like Egypt get there first? Perhaps Jordan or Iraq even?
34 posts omitted. (View thread)
>> No. 77179
File 139178650091.jpg - (75.04KB , 540x411 , un-hrc-cartoon.jpg )

>Unfortunately, the UN decides what the UN shows interest in and what it shouldn't show interest in.

Then of course you have their obvious bias against certain religions, like for instance when they just recently came out with a report telling the Vatican what to do about certain things they think the Vatican should address, yet they won't tell the Ayatollah in Iran and the other Islamofacists and other violent religious extremists like him that run most of the governments in the Middle East to do the same things they just tried to bully the Vatican into doing.

Example, the Vatican doesn't like homosexuality but leaves gays alone, but in Iran they don't like gays and in turn kill gays. But the UN chooses to ignore Iran and attack the Vatican.

And don't even get me started on their Antisemitism.

Last edited at Fri, Feb 7th, 2014 08:25

>> No. 77189
> Iran and attack the Vatican

It depends on what the context is really, but I could see the vatican being much easier to target and probably to influence than Iran.

I'm really not aware of 'religicism' or whatever we might want to call it, on part of the UN.
>> No. 77197
The Vatican has made it clear it does not bow to the UN either. http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2014/02/07/fr_lombardi_sj:_note_on_childrens_rights_committee_findings_/en1-771101

To pick out a few points:

Father Federico Lombardi, director of the Vatican Press Office, released a lengthy response Friday to the report given by the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child. In his statement, Lombardi said the committee’s recommendations went “beyond its competencies” to “interfere in the very doctrinal and moral positions of the Catholic Church.”

The Committee’s remarks gave “indications involving moral evaluations of contraception, or abortion, or education in families, or the vision of human sexuality, in light of [the Committee’s] own ideological vision of sexuality itself.”

As CWN reported [www.catholicculture.org] that the Vatican spokesman “strongly suggested that the report had been drafted in advance, without waiting for the Vatican’s own report.”

“Finally, one cannot but observe that the tone, development, and the publicity given by the Committee in its document are absolutely anomalous when compared to its normal progress in relations with other States that are party to the Convention.”

Delete post []
Report post

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