Leaning

Jean Ad?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AK8s3iqL99c

Sydney Sweeney Has Great Jeans | American Eagle

. . . It's 'just an Ad. . . . . .

(Shrug) Well, I've never really understood some people's hyperfixation on celebrities and gossip either.

I doubt it'll 'keep people's attention.

Though I'm not sure how much people will care about the Epstein issue either.

. . . Still, there's at least a 'few threads about Epstein and Trump on this site.

And I 'just heard the some news station on the TV complaining about Maxwell being moved to a less security prison.

I'd 'imagine it's still on people's minds.

Theists today don't really want to believe in a half good, half evil God. Most would rather grapple with the problem of evil than adjust their beliefs about the character of their creator. - #19

Theists in general, or specifically Monotheists? Abrahamic?

Reminds me of PhilosophicalJay's thread.

What western pagans/polytheists are missing

https://www.debatecraft.com/forum/c/religion/posts/1f/what-western-paganspolytheists-are-missing

I seem to remember a lot of Pagan Gods being evil at times, or human or natural disaster evil one might say. Depending on the story.

But then you say Theists today.

Lot of different interpretations over time and space, of the Abrahamic God, I'm sure.

Emotivism

"The idea that ethical statements are mere expressions of emotional states in regards to certain actions, states of being, ect."

- PhilosophicalJay #1

I'm still not sure I understand,

So, statement that stealing is wrong, could be described by Emotivism as,

My stealing will make me unhappy, because I don't like stealing even when I do it. So Boo to stealing.

My stealing will make me happy, because I like stealing when I do it. So Hurrah stealing.

Others stealing will make me unhappy, because I empathize with people's suffering. So Boo to stealing.

Others stealing will make me neutral, because I don't empathize with others suffering. So Nothing to stealing.

Society says stealing is wrong, because enough of the people who make the law are unhappy by stealing in general. So Boo to stealing.

Though I suppose the emotion doesn't have to be 'happy/unhappy?

. . .

Stealing is wrong, because it might happen to me and make me angry. But I only 'say such, to encourage 'others not to steal.

Hm, shame, guilt, surprise, fear, gratitude.

https://exestentialcomics.com/comic/42

A Dialogue on Happiness

. . . Hm, could one say all emotions are happ- Hm, positive or negative?

Some surprised sensations are nice, but then that is excitement, not fear.

Amused, Bored.

Grateful, Resentful.

Some people prioritize the miserable though. Pursue and uphold ethical choices that don't make them 'happy.

Unless one considers fulfilled duty a 'sort of happiness.

Mostly 2, little bit of 3, I imagine.

I sure enjoy consuming media, 'sometimes think on and comment on it.

I don't really 'do much, don't really 'make stuff happen much.

. . .

If species exist, I don't see why race wouldn't exist.

Although, I 'suppose one can argue classifications can be a bit arbitrary at times.

It appears to me too 'real, not to exist in 'some sense.

Neanderthals existed, chimps exist, cats, dogs, breeds of various cats and dogs. Various breeds of humans.

. . . We have clumps of people we are connected to by blood.

. . . In a Classless MMORPG, archetypes 'still emerge based on the skills one selects.

I've heard 'cats and humans have a lot of genes in common.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/human-genomes-are-surprisingly-cat-like-180978332/

I'm seeing 90% a lot when I Google, but nothing that looks 'official science claims.

I'm also unsure how much the 'arrangement of the genes is the same.

7-1=6

1-7=-6

Both share all three numbers, doesn't mean outcome is nearly the same.

Maybe human or cat, most of the genome for physical is not physically expressed,

But I'm not sure it matters.

Whatever small amount 'is physically expressed has an impact, maybe.

'Matter to some people.

'All life shares 100% 'material.

. . .

What measure is human?

As science advances, and we gain ability to edit and put together human derived organisms.

I'm not sure what you mean by traditional medicine.

I've heard some Asian cultures refer to food as medicine.

Lot of modern doctors recommend certain diets to people, or recommend they eat enough vegetables or fruits.

I imagine that there 'are various pills that are useful in managing blood pressure and various other conditions.

Course exercise and what one eats is good too.

But doctors 'encourage exercise, and weight management. They don't 'only encourage drugs, I imagine.

I don't know much anything about DNA.

I've heard of genes from great grandparents, rarely showing up again. In their Great Grandkids.

I've heard of people discriminated against by their own races, after developing Vitiligo or Hyperpigmentation.

I can imagine an individual having the outward 'looks of X race, but having more than half their genes be of Y race.

. . . Course, I imagine most humans might 'mostly share the same genes anyhow.

. . . So one would be accounting for the genes we 'don't all share, in having more than half their genes be of Y race. Even if they 'look X race.

Maybe, Information is useful for making sense of the world.

Binary is easier to categorize.

Easier to keep track of.

Make snap decisions on.

Binary 'misses a lot of the nuance though, true situations, ideal outcomes of decisions we 'could make.

"Does the money mean more than your life? Mal #1"

No, though I've sometimes wondered how I might react if someone demanded my money or my life.

I 'imagine I'd just give up my wallet, maybe try to get my ID and Cards out first.

I suppose I 'might resist out of some principle, not wanting to be stepped on, or disliking the idea of having to call the various card people, cancel cards, get replacements.

. . . Hm, maybe depend on how much money I had?

Well, the money wouldn't mean 'more than my life, but certain amounts of money, I might risk my life for, especially if I thought the risk was low enough.

People have lived as raiders and pirates, risking their lives for money.

But it's not 'just the money, it's what one can do with it.

Lifetime of ease vs Lifetime of poverty and toil.

"Is there anything you can do within the system that does not require money being involved or spent? Mal #1"

Question sounds familiar, but money tends to be tied to countries, sadly one often can't even 'own land, only rent it form the government.

There is a lot in life one 'can do without money though, ignoring the need to upkeep and fuel one's body.

. . . I suppose one can live homeless, scavenge and rely on others for food and medical. Not 'ideal life for me though.

If the answer is no, there really is no such thing as "financial freedom". Mal #1"

Relative maybe.

One is 'always limited maybe.

Free to move about, but bound by laws of gravity.

If there were no limits/laws, would there even be a board by which to play the game?

Instead of curing cancer, it's more profitable to not . Mal #1"

Sometimes I imagine.

But I don't imagine the rich are driven purely by piling money like a dragon. . . Well, 'sometimes.

Some maybe want social change, betterment of society.

Can't take the money with you, but footprint on the world lasts a while.

. . . Maybe some just want their name on a university though.

I sometimes wonder why there are not more rich individuals acting as cult leaders or warlords, tyrants of cities and counties.

. . . Maybe they 'are in a sense, but not so visible, or painting with the mediums I'd expect.

I was out of hamburger buns, last week when I made some burgers at home,

Had to use hotdog buns.

(Grin)

A lot of locations and times in history weren't 'so great.

. . . But there's something comfortable about regularity. Tradition, what one is used to.

Morality and Ethics are often based off the norms of society.

Sure one can argue tradition isn't always good, and I agree. . . People have a lot of different values, pulling in different directions, contradicting one another. Ends we want to work toward. Don't always just want what we now have.

But,

You imply 'maybe, a continual increase in good resulting from technology,

Imply I think that we can 'expect such in the future.

Seems an assumption.

“History Doesn't Repeat Itself, but It Often Rhymes” – Mark Twain

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqzIX6w9SJo&t=1s

Implants Forcibly Removed After Medical Trials

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xsekZPgQJVQ

Tech is Moving Faster Than Law: Who Owns Thought Data?

Course we don't 'have to end up in a dystopian future I suppose. Tool results depends on 'how we use the tool.

And I'm not saying we ought 'not keep researching and developing technology,

Just some periods of life cycles of organisms development, not always the most pleasant.

Fermi Paradox includes a number of unpleasant ends due to technology, I imagine.

Most Pacific salmon species are programmed to die after spawning.

My money says Zed.

I suppose short term is the Dust Bowl, Mao's Sparrows, Leaded Gas, Agent Orange.

Effects within a few generations.

I doubt AI's going to be that bad in the short term. . . Except we maybe keep developing technology faster and faster.

Long term. . . Don't know 1000, 2000 years?

At times I worry just how 'alien humans might end up, to what I am used to.

. . . 'Maybe not a bad thing, but one is used to dystopian Sci Fi sometimes.

I think I don't know much about gymnastics.

Still, if James movement wasn't a full, yeah, they ought call it something else.

Well, their incorrect lingo will never make it into the Olympics I imagine.

Though I 'think gymnastics and Olympics still use tilted flips?

Just don't call them 'full flips?

I've heard of people using poles in the the Netherlands, to jump dykes, rather than walk all the way to a bridge.

Or shepherds in the Canary Islands, using poles to climb and drop off 'small cliffs and rocks, where there is no easy paths.

Course, I 'think one 'usually hears of Parkour more in cities. More cameras maybe.

. . . Also, maybe it wouldn't be Parkour if one uses a pole.

I think I've seen little palm claw gloves in a few different cultures, to grab surfaces better.

Shuko, for ninjas in Japan.

Course as you say, not all that 'useful for most people.

Cities having so many stairs and ladders. Cities are 'built for people, usually.

Suddenly I'm reminded of Disney's Aladdin though,

Parkour, societies police car chases, 'before cars.

I sometimes wonder how useful Parkour could be in war.

I 'think I've read about it in history before, people training to leap over walls of moderate height. But I don't remember if such was a 'real reference or fictional. Certainly even modern militaries have climbing walls in lot of obstacle courses. Repel down helicopters.

Course, lot of modern soldiers gear can also be pretty heavy I think.

Lot of people 'climbed castles and walls I imagine, to spy or try for the gate.

I read about soldiers climbing up a toilet chute once, to take a castle. Siege of Château Gaillard.

Then there's that old line, they're in the trees.

. . .

Course, Parkour is a bit more 'active I think maybe.

. . . Seems to me it might have been more useful before firearms, but then, maybe there's something to be said for an elevated position, bypassing walls and buildings and corridors, even in modern war at times.

I actually did a debate on guns recently,

https://www.debateart.com/debates/6315-gun-rights-in-the-usa

So were lead pipes in Rome, or whenever they were invented.

. . . Not that I 'know AI to be a negative outcome, but I can't 'guess the outcome.

I've not an inkling of it's effects or all the various other techs that may soon be.

Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!

The Great and Powerful Skynet has spoken!

@Wryly

"Will you be willing to put your family last? If not , is that why you're an atheist?" - Mal

"Can you (or anyone) explain wtf this means." - Wryly

I assumed it meant that in religion, people often put God or Highest Value above family.

Berean Standard Bible

"Anyone who loves his father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me;"

https://biblehub.com/matthew/10-37.htm

@philochristos

Because even if someone isn't 'religious about their atheism,

They likely still have Metaphysical Beliefs and Claims that they operate on.

Though I'm not sure everyone would agree such 'constitutes a religion.

Yet various Pagan Religions must have spread at 'one point or another. I'd think.

Taking over large regions.

. . . Lot of culture, local beliefs, local practices in Paganism, I'd think.

Lack of 'somewhat objective Holy Books.

. . . Though I'd imagine a number had various oral traditions.

Paganism often tied to 'country/people group, maybe.

I recall reading of Greeks and Romans, how some people would claim foreign Gods to be their own Gods, or Their own Gods as foreign Gods.

Just under slightly different names and looks. God of War is a God of War, God of Harvest God of Harvest.

. . . Though, I'd imagine that tends to work best when the Gods actually 'do have similarities, as cultures close to and culturally bleeding into one another, might do.

If my God of War is a guy that says no Mercy, and someone else's God of war is a woman who says mercy, maybe not the same God.

Course doesn't stop people from just extending their pantheon.

I wonder if that's how one might get some versions of Hinduism with thousands of Gods.

. . . Spread of Paganism, one method could be the displacing of foreign populaces and putting your own populaces and temples there.

. . .

But then I recall various religions in the Bible, that didn't require such. often a problem in the Old Testament, people worshipping foreign Gods, or marrying foreign queens and ending up with foreign god temples being built. Asherah poles.

I suppose,

People 'do vary quite a bit, in what sparks in them, emotional reaction/value/appreciation.

Or what 'use, said reaction has.

Well, that's where one gets Deists, I imagine.

The filtering is 'voluntary though,

It gives people the 'option to avoid people and posts they'd rather avoid.

They don't 'have to turn the "hide offensive content." on.

I'd also argue that naked and shouting 'are options.

Whether in text, or as we have 'now, easily posted pictures.

In a 'sense, images and even 'text can be 'visual noise, shouting.

Bold print, ALL CAPS, An individual spamming words everywhere.

Take ads for instance, were they 'everywhere in society, every wall and surface, even if just 'print, bit like shouting there.

. . . The 'purpose of large signs in protests, 'is to shout through the written word.

. . . Profiles pictures were regulated on DDO and DART, so too various 'questionable 'contents of words.

If anything this system allows people to post 'more than they would be able to without it.

As 'without this system, posts might be 'removed, not hidden from the sight of those who 'choose the 'option of block offensive content.

We humans 'do like categorizing existence into various boxes,

Course some sciences such as biology, end up with a lot of said items 'leaping out of their boxes years later.

X animal is X, oh wait, exception found.

Man is a featherless biped, until Diogenes walks up with a plucked chicken, then we have to add broad flat nails.

I can't say I think 'too much of why some people believe,

I just assume they've had different "conditioning and sensory suggestion" as you say.

. . . Some people might argue a number of Atheists have degrees of Spiritual Blindness, but as Polytheistwitch says "plenty of atheists involved in spiritual practices".

I admit, I've not been looking 'for God or various spiritual ideas so much, and what I 'might see or hear of, I am quick to discount.

I don't think it does much more than 'current society, 'less really.

In 'real life society, a person can't go around nude in many places, or be shouting in the library.

What is offered here is earpieces and sunglasses, to visually and audially tune the problem people out.

Yet, the problem individuals are 'still 'there, nude and shouting, 'unlike real life.

. . .

I imagine there are internet locations 'more free of censorship than here.

I suppose it 'can be,

Though I think it depends a bit on how one looks at it.

Black mascara and black clothes can be fashion groups, Goths, Emos, and such, I assume.

But there's also people who just like black mascara and black clothes, without overly being involved with a group of people or their ideas.

I suppose 'technically one might see various. . . metaphysical? Ethics, Morals, Ought's, Creeds, as religions of sorts.

I 'think people tend to categorize them more group culturally though.

Not that individual religions can't exist, solely for the one.

. . .

I 'did wonder when making my Profile, whether I ought put Atheism under religion, but I went with none.

I'm not a militant atheist. Though not all militant atheists might see such as their religion.

I just don't have 'too much of a cultural belief/ritual on my mind,

Though I 'did put Atheism under Beliefs.

. . .

"Will you be willing to put your family last?"

Well, I suppose 'some people of various religions 'do put their Gods or Ideals first before family,

Even some people 'without stated religion, 'still have Ideals they might put above family.

Individuals who turn in family members for being serial killers for instance. Putting morality, law, society, other humans first.

Though they might also put their family member first by such an action, to turn them in is to help them be a good person, ideally some might say.

Well, 'I'm an Atheist because I don't think God exists,

I suppose I might have been an Alatrist or something similar for a time before my Atheism,

Believing in but not worshipping God, out of my self interest.

As long as one can opt in or opt out,

Seems alright to me.

Though I suppose one can argue the person being censored 'can't opt in or out, (Though they 'can opt in or out of the site)

. . . Eh, people 'do like free speech, but people also like regulated speech in some places.

Libraries for instance.

I'm not sure,

While I 'do think humans anthropomorphize nature too much,

When an organism gets 'really intelligent acting, I'd figure it 'has an intelligence.

I also worry I don't give nature 'enough credit at times.

Give a dog a few buttons it can press, the dog could probably tell you "Jack" "Food Dish",

I doubt Jack 'understands everything in that situation,

But maybe he understands that when he jumps on those two buttons, his food dish gets filled.

. . . Some parrots just repeat words without thinking them through any, but probably some humans do that too, and maybe some parrots that understand a 'bit.

. . .

Maybe 'ants?

Bunch of little organisms working together, thoughtless individuals,

Yet meaningful actions taken as a group?

. . . Though some people argue there exist some 'pretty smart ants. I'm doubtful though.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/YDZHIBqOZN8

Ants engage in warfare and field medicine

Oh 'sure ants rip off the limbs of some injured ants, apply spit or what have you,

Some ants 'herd aphids,

But if one doesn't 'know or 'understand what one is doing, then the ants are only doing as much as a programmed 'electronical might do.