# Things You Consider to be 'True'



## Boundman (Jun 6, 2015)

We all have things we fundamentally believe are true, for example, some people absolutely believe that people don't change.

What have you found to be absolutely true in your life? (with the least amount of powerlevelling, if possible)

I personally believe that we are all drawn to certain genetic traits and you will never be happy until you accept and embrace them and work on yourself from there. People I've met act like they're the protagonist in some movie and think they're tougher than they are because of it. If they accepted they are fairly weak and began to work around that or work on it they'd be much happier than they are with pseudo traits they attempt to give themselves.


----------



## autisticdragonkin (Jun 6, 2015)

It is true that sensory information and thoughts exist regardless of their source (although some basic inference can lead to the conclusion that the most likely scenario is that they have the sources generally ascribed to them at about 99.999999% probability)


----------



## Boundman (Jun 6, 2015)

autisticdragonkin said:


> It is true that sensory information and thoughts exist regardless of their source (although some basic inference can lead to the conclusion that the most likely scenario is that they have the sources generally ascribed to them at about 99.999999% probability)



I'm referring to things you have learned and live by.

I dunno if you meant that and I'm just being autistic and reading it the wrong way though hahaha.


----------



## Bronchitis that Lingers (Jun 6, 2015)

Karma will come and bite you in the ass, one way or another.


----------



## autisticdragonkin (Jun 6, 2015)

Karnon said:


> I'm referring to things you have learned and live by.
> 
> I dunno if you meant that and I'm just being autistic and reading it the wrong way though hahaha.


I misunderstood what was being asked

As far as things I have learned and live by:

Things are not always as they intuitively seem so always do the math to check your intuition


----------



## Bronchitis that Lingers (Jun 6, 2015)

Philosophy Zombie said:


> The only thing I can be completely certain of is that everyone posting in the Laverne Cox thread can go suck a giant bag of dicks.


What happens in the Laverne Cox thread, stays in the Laverne Cox thread.


----------



## Boundman (Jun 6, 2015)

Bronchitis that Lingers said:


> Karma will come and bite you in the ass, one way or another.



I've never been a believer in karma, always cause-and-effect. If you do something bad often enough, eventually something will give and it'll all come out. Some attribute that to karma, I attribute it to chance. You roll the dice enough and eventually you'll get two sixes.


----------



## Bronchitis that Lingers (Jun 6, 2015)

Karnon said:


> I've never been a believer in karma, always cause-and-effect. If you do something bad often enough, eventually something will give and it'll all come out. Some attribute that to karma, I attribute it to chance. You roll the dice enough and eventually you'll get two sixes.


I can agree with that. Everything has a balance. Tip it one way too far and something else has to correct it.


----------



## Abethedemon (Jun 7, 2015)

Metal, but only true metal


----------



## Philosophy Zombie (Jun 7, 2015)

Bronchitis that Lingers said:


> What happens in the Laverne Cox thread, stays in the Laverne Cox thread.



That was a joke in poor taste and I apologize.



Karnon said:


> some people absolutely believe that people don't change.



In my opinion, people are more malleable than some people think. Thinking you are unable to change can lead to complacency and a failure to improve your life. For example, many fat acceptance activists think that weight is all genetic and weight loss is a fluke, so they put on pounds until they're 500+ not because they_ can't _make the lifestyle changes necessary to lose the weight but because they are unwilling to make the effort to change.


----------



## Bronchitis that Lingers (Jun 7, 2015)

Philosophy Zombie said:


> For example, many fat acceptance activists think that weight is all genetic and weight loss is a fluke, so they put on pounds until they're 500+ not because they_ can't _make the lifestyle changes necessary to lose the weight but because they are unwilling to make the effort to change.



This is so true. Change starts from within, if you tell yourself that you can't change, you never will. This is my problem with fat acceptance; it's good to not hate your body, but you're still putting yourself at risk for heart disease, high blood pressure, etc. _that _should not be accepted. That's just an excuse to not change yourself for the better, to perpetuate laziness, and most likely has to do with the fear of failure if one tries to lose weight but nothing comes of it.


----------



## Boundman (Jun 7, 2015)

Bronchitis that Lingers said:


> This is so true. Change starts from within, if you tell yourself that you can't change, you never will. This is my problem with fat acceptance; it's good to not hate your body, but you're still putting yourself at risk for heart disease, high blood pressure, etc. _that _should not be accepted. That's just an excuse to not change yourself for the better, to perpetuate laziness, and most likely has to do with the fear of failure if one tries to lose weight but nothing comes of it.



"Beauty at any size" is so ridiculous. I dislike the way people attempt to remove stigma from _everything_.

Like it or not, stigma is necessary for society. If you don't shame those who don't work and stigmatise them, then people won't work. If you don't make jokes about the guy who doesn't shower, then you discomfort other people who have to be near them.

I do believe that being fat doesn't make you inherently ugly, but what I do think society should call ugly and shame is those who are evidently overweight and obese and doing nothing about it. These are the last people who need approval society should say "No, you're not beautiful, you're a strain on the economy and you're unhealthy. Go for a jog.".


----------



## NobleGreyHorse (Jun 7, 2015)

How do you know the person is "doing nothing about it" unless you know them, though? Like, I imagine I'd have to live in a really small town to know that Jane Q. Smith wasn't practicing portion control or had never discussed safe weight loss with her doctor. It's also possible to be obese and anorexic at the same time, so Jane might be going too far in the "doing something about it" direction and again, how would you know? It doesn't always lead to the skeletal figure we think of with anorexia because people can fuck up their endocrine systems for life that way. Serious biz. 

Also, from the sheer number of people just on these forums who go all Better Than Chris by bragging about how they were off work for a week one time because of a sprained ankle, and they nearly an-heroed because of blinding, soul-crushing boredom, it seems to me that there are people who would do some work-like activity regardless of pay, etc. Otherwise, how do you explain volunteerism? Again, I'm not trying to state flatly that you're wrong, but I'm actually interested in how your worldview accounts for those things.

My true things about the world are almost in opposition:
1. Sociopaths (or psychopaths, or people with Antisocial Personality Disorder, however you classify them) are real. The leading researcher on them estimates they may be up to 4-5% of the population. That's a lot. I was married to one, and like my ex, most of them fly under the radar. They sabotage other people's lives; they play people against each other; they become your instant but very fake best friend... but they are not like Dexter or even Bendybum Cumberbund as Sherlock. They work hard to seem very ordinary, but occasionally the mask slips; they say something terrible and baseless about you or your friend/family member/etc. and you're like "Dude, wtf?" Toward the end of my marriage, my sister was using her half of my mother's estate to work with the most reputable international-adoption agency in the US, and then-husband accused her of "buying babies." For some reason, that was worse than the putdowns of _me_ I had become so used to.

2. However, for the non-sociopathic majority of the population, most of them will turn out to do really cool things if given a chance. Example: I used to have a seizure disorder that was caused by my complex PTSD -- apparently this is more common than it sounds like. And one day, I had one when I was almost home, very close to my front door. The guy who came and helped me was a Black guy who looked like every "ghetto" stereotype a racist could dream up: sagging his jean shorts, hair in cornrows, wearing a white t-shirt but with a different t-shirt slung over his shoulder. And that was the guy who crossed the street (just before the seizure, I had seen him coming up the other side of the street, and I remember thinking he was kind of cute) and made sure I didn't bash my head in on my own porch. Afterwards, he asked me if there was anything I needed, would I like him to call anyone, etc., and when I said all I needed was to get inside, he helped me up the steps, waved goodbye, then sauntered off without waiting to be thanked (or to see which apartment I went into). Like this was his normal day, saving women from seizures. I never got his name and I'm not sure I've ever seen him again. But damn, he did a good thing for no reason and with no apparent expectation of reward.


----------



## dabluearmedbandit (Jun 7, 2015)

Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me. And if words can hurt you, you're a pussy who probably deserves it.


----------



## AnOminous (Jun 7, 2015)

Karnon said:


> These are the last people who need approval society should say "No, you're not beautiful, you're a strain on the economy and you're unhealthy. Go for a jog.".



People have the right to do all these things.  You have the right to have a shitty diet and not exercise and be fat, to smoke three packs of cigarettes a day, to drink yourself into oblivion every night.  What you don't have the right to do is demand that people actually approve of your shitty decisions.


----------



## Boundman (Jun 7, 2015)

NobleGreyHorse said:


> How do you know the person is "doing nothing about it" unless you know them, though? Like, I imagine I'd have to live in a really small town to know that Jane Q. Smith wasn't practicing portion control or had never discussed safe weight loss with her doctor. It's also possible to be obese and anorexic at the same time, so Jane might be going too far in the "doing something about it" direction and again, how would you know? It doesn't always lead to the skeletal figure we think of with anorexia because people can fuck up their endocrine systems for life that way.



If you know someone who's massive for about a year or two and never changes, then they aren't doing anything about it. If they were, then they'd be skinnier by now.

I'm not saying "Find people above x pounds, laugh at them", I'm saying society has a duty to place stigma on a size so the person feels bad for it. If they're ill, obviously this is an exception.

It's like smoking weed, if you do nothing but smoke weed all the time then society labels you a lazy stoner and rightly so. But if someone is using weed as an escape or has a reliance on it, that's not their fault. The same goes for eating shit and doing nothing about it vs someone who is addicted to food or ill and so it is out of their control.

Whilst I am happy we're discussing this, I don't want to veer too far off the conversation topic, so I'm going to limit myself to what I do and don't respond to.


----------



## SU 390 (Jun 7, 2015)

Karnon said:


> "Beauty at any size" is so ridiculous. I dislike the way people attempt to remove stigma from _everything_.
> 
> Like it or not, stigma is necessary for society. If you don't shame those who don't work and stigmatise them, then people won't work. If you don't make jokes about the guy who doesn't shower, then you discomfort other people who have to be near them.
> 
> I do believe that being fat doesn't make you inherently ugly, but what I do think society should call ugly and shame is those who are evidently overweight and obese and doing nothing about it. These are the last people who need approval society should say "No, you're not beautiful, you're a strain on the economy and you're unhealthy. Go for a jog.".



There are ways to encourage people to lead to a healthy lifestyle and there's ways of being a dick. Your post makes you sound like those arrogant bodybuilders and the fucktards over at ROK that believe fat women and selfie sticks are the _death of America_(bullshit, greedy politicians, economy linked to China, and sub-par infrastructure is the _death of America)_. Some people have reasons for being the weight they are. Yes, obesity is a strain to the economy and an issue, but so is anorexia. Shaming someone is only going to make them even more upset and possibly prevent them from changing. This is coming from someone who's thin with a fast metabo.



NobleGreyHorse said:


> Otherwise, how do you explain volunteerism?



Volunteerism helps gain employment. If you're someone with no work experience, who the hell is going to hire you? Retail can be an exception but not all the time.



dabluearmedbandit said:


> Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me. And if words can hurt you, you're a pussy who probably deserves it.



That's debatable.

Back on topic these are what I think are 'true'.

1. 90% of the time, humans are inherently selfish. These days especially, humans are selfish. Everyone is secretly looking out for their own asses. If shit hits the fan(in terms of the stock market crashing or another Great Depression, hopefully those two won't happen but who knows) everyone will fight tooth and nail for survival.

2. No one is equal. As much as I want equality for everyone, we're not equal. SJWs and Progressives can try and change shit but at the end of the day we aren't equal. Sure we all have something in common at the end of the day, going home, eating, settling down before going to bed and back to work/school/looking for work. We're all different in a way.

3. Nothing lasts forever and make the most of it. My quiet life died in 2007 and I have pieces of it whenever everyone is in bed, or when I'm taking a walk, going to school, working(volunteering for my end, hopefully and it will change soon). Sadly to say I took my quiet life for granted and now am suffering. I know my situation isn't permanent but I long for the quiet life I enjoyed in my childhood to mid teen days.

4. No one can judge you, you know who you are. Whether you're a good person or a piece of shit you know who you are. Some people can say they know you(depending on how long they've been in your life) but you're the only that understands you. If you change for the better, good, I'm happy and wish you the best. If you change for the worst or if you're already a shit person and you won't ever change, fuck you, stay out of my life and personal space.


----------



## Marvin (Jun 7, 2015)

Karnon said:


> "Beauty at any size" is so ridiculous. I dislike the way people attempt to remove stigma from _everything_.
> 
> Like it or not, stigma is necessary for society. If you don't shame those who don't work and stigmatise them, then people won't work. If you don't make jokes about the guy who doesn't shower, then you discomfort other people who have to be near them.
> 
> I do believe that being fat doesn't make you inherently ugly, but what I do think society should call ugly and shame is those who are evidently overweight and obese and doing nothing about it. These are the last people who need approval society should say "No, you're not beautiful, you're a strain on the economy and you're unhealthy. Go for a jog.".


Why should they do anything about it if they're happy? Like really, fatness is a bad thing, in absolute terms, but no one lives a 100% healthy life. Like, you might as well go around judging every person for not jogging every day and living like a monk. Also, no, actually fat people can look beautiful. Genuinely. For a big part of human history, fatness was attractive. Tastes change, of course, but you can't really say, categorically, "you're fat and thus not beautiful".

Like, see, the big problem is that you can see fatness, while you can't see other health issues. It reminds me of racism (in design, not in extent). Like, as far as racism goes, I don't think black people or dark people exist as a special category of stereotyping. All ethnicities get stereotyped. Polish, Italian, French, whatever, they all get stereotyped. But the difference is that you can't see frenchness. I think I mentioned elsewhere, but it's like my roommate. My roommate is italian, and he can indulge in his italianness when he's telling a funny family story or talking about his ethnic heritage. But when he needs to, he can drop any ethnic identity and get all the benefits of being white. Like with his job. Black people can't really do that.

Similarly, fatness is one of the few health issues that you can see. Someone can drink like a fish, and they don't get judged by how they look. Someone can be a pack-a-day smoker and they don't get judged (unless they're caught in the act).

I mean, not that I blame people for this. Reacting to someone's appearance is a very natural, human response. But I'd hope people would think about it a bit more and try to temper their reactions.


----------



## Bronchitis that Lingers (Jun 7, 2015)

WanderingVagabond said:


> There are ways to encourage people to lead to a healthy lifestyle and there's ways of being a dick. Your post makes you sound like those arrogant bodybuilders and the fucktards over at ROK that believe fat women and selfie sticks are the _death of America_(bullshit, greedy politicians, economy linked to China, and sub-par infrastructure is the _death of America)_. Some people have reasons for being the weight they are. Yes, obesity is a strain to the economy and an issue, but so is anorexia. Shaming someone is only going to make them even more upset and possibly prevent them from changing. This is coming from someone who's thin with a fast metabo.


There are people who are overweight, and then there are people who are obese, on the verge of death, gaining everyday, that has the option to lose weight but doesn't take it.
There's a fine line between accepting your body type/genes, and refusing to lose weight even in the face of heart disease or other conditions.
It might not matter to the person who's doing this to themselves, but what if they have a spouse or children who will desperately miss them once they pass due to their own diet? That's when stigma comes into play. Not every person is like this, there are millions of overweight people who work their ass off to lose weight and can't, and then they accept that's something they can't change. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that. But if someone with a small frame has started eating themselves under the table, never works out and starts developing heart conditions, something is needed to snap them out of it before they do irreversible damage. I agree that it is not a perfect system, because like you said, anorexia can have the same effects (heart disease) and if becoming and increasingly bigger problem every day.

There just needs to be more of a line between acceptance and pure laziness, just like how there needs to be a larger line in between being healthy and starving yourself.
Everything in moderation, which going back to the topic, is another thing I follow.


----------



## AnOminous (Jun 7, 2015)

Marvin said:


> Similarly, fatness is one of the few health issues that you can see. Someone can drink like a fish, and they don't get judged by how they look. Someone can be a pack-a-day smoker and they don't get judged (unless they're caught in the act).



There's nothing more despised than a smoker these days, and no habit that more people will not openly criticize someone for, even (especially) their friends and family.  And the rate of smoking has sharply declined as it has been increasingly stigmatized.  It's not like the fact that it's bad for you is recent news.  However, the social stigma and actual legislation and regulation burdening the choice to smoke is.


----------



## Blueberry (Jun 7, 2015)

Marriage is a investment into future misery


----------



## cumrobbery (Jun 7, 2015)

Life's too short to be pissed off all the time.


----------



## RepQuest (Jun 7, 2015)

Most of the world's problems can be traced to people either trying to get out of their responsibilities or being willing but unable to uphold their commitments.


----------



## KingGeedorah (Jun 8, 2015)

Child porn is awful. Fuck those people who make that shit.


----------



## DuskEngine (Jun 8, 2015)

People will work much harder to make the world correspond to their beliefs than vice versa.


----------



## Bronchitis that Lingers (Jun 8, 2015)

Dean Ween said:


> Marriage is a investment into future misery


not sure if you're trolling or not, but I am very against marriage. I'm basically married, just without a ring on my finger and a title, and my heartsweet and I intend to keep it this way. I've watched couples marry young and fall apart, or spend years miserable because they don't have the money to get divorced. It's depressing as fuck, even more so when the people married only did it because:
 A) They have a child 
 B) Pressure from family
 C) The title
Knowing that if my current relationship goes south, I can leave and not have to go through with the court system, makes my relationship stronger. There is _nothing _tying my heartsweet to me other than a mutual commitment to each other. I have never put my name with anyone else's on a lease (dodged a bullet with my last relationship on that since the person I was with got evicted), went half and half on a huge purchase, or furthered my cohabitation with an engagement. It's meaningless to me.
I'm also _very_ adamant about being child-free, so this also ties into a lot with my views on marriage.


----------



## Boundman (Jun 8, 2015)

Marvin said:


> Why should they do anything about it if they're happy? Like really, fatness is a bad thing, in absolute terms, but no one lives a 100% healthy life. Like, you might as well go around judging every person for not jogging every day and living like a monk. Also, no, actually fat people can look beautiful. Genuinely. For a big part of human history, fatness was attractive. Tastes change, of course, but you can't really say, categorically, "you're fat and thus not beautiful".
> 
> Like, see, the big problem is that you can see fatness, while you can't see other health issues. It reminds me of racism (in design, not in extent). Like, as far as racism goes, I don't think black people or dark people exist as a special category of stereotyping. All ethnicities get stereotyped. Polish, Italian, French, whatever, they all get stereotyped. But the difference is that you can't see frenchness. I think I mentioned elsewhere, but it's like my roommate. My roommate is italian, and he can indulge in his italianness when he's telling a funny family story or talking about his ethnic heritage. But when he needs to, he can drop any ethnic identity and get all the benefits of being white. Like with his job. Black people can't really do that.
> 
> ...



What do you do when you have a drug addict who's happy? Would you leave them be too?

These are both things that are unhealthy addictions, if you place stigma on the addictions, you dissuade people from it.

I'm also not saying "anyone overweight is absolutely ugly", you can be overweight and still have your health, just less ability. These are people I would exclude from judgement. The people I'm talking about are the plain and simple unhealthy ones, people who are goddamn massive and see nothing wrong with that. One third of America is obese, and I very much doubt every single one of those people are I'll or just don't have access to healthy foods.

Smokers have been stigmatised, past the right point in my opinion. If someone is a smoker, especially in Britain, they definitely are looked down upon by society. Everyone complains that they're a strain on the NHS and should be taken off, but no-one wants to apply that logic to the very fat. All because to tell someone they're enormous and it's not beautiful and we won't treat your type-2 diabetes or your arthritis is apparently awful.


----------



## Bronchitis that Lingers (Jun 8, 2015)

Karnon said:


> Smokers have been stigmatised, past the right point in my opinion. If someone is a smoker, especially in Britain, they definitely are looked down upon by society. Everyone complains that they're a strain on the NHS and should be taken off, but no-one wants to apply that logic to the very fat. All because to tell someone they're enormous and it's not beautiful and we won't treat your type-2 diabetes or your arthritis is apparently awful.



Here's the double standard I don't understand. I just saw a Truth ad today with trap music and kool kids acting awesome and NOT SMOKING because SMOKING IS BAD, followed by a Mickey D's commercial. If you smoke everyday, you will have health problems. If you eat McDonald's everyday, you will also have health problems. They're both choices one makes knowing full well what they're getting into. One is stigmatized and one isn't. Obesity and smoke cause some of the _exact same conditions_ and you don't see anti-obesity commercials on TV.

Why are people allowed to call smokers "disgusting" but not people who stuff their face with fast food? I understand second hand smoke to a degree, but if you don't want to inhale the smoke, no one is forcing you now that smoking isn't allowed 15 feet in front of a business, in bars, on planes, etc. yet the stigma attached to it is worse than in the times where you could smoke everywhere. 

Outside of a cigar on a blue moon, I don't even smoke, and it still annoys me.


----------



## DuskEngine (Jun 8, 2015)

Bronchitis that Lingers said:


> Why are people allowed to call smokers "disgusting" but not people who stuff their face with fast food? I understand second hand smoke to a degree, but if you don't want to inhale the smoke, no one is forcing you now that smoking isn't allowed 15 feet in front of a business, in bars, on planes, etc. yet the stigma attached to it is worse than in the times where you could smoke everywhere.



The whole secondhand smoking thing is seriously overhyped. The chance of you getting cancer from breathing in a stray puff of smoke is absurdly negligible. It was only an issue, as I understand it, with bartenders and other people who worked in closed environments that were filled with smoke.


----------



## NobleGreyHorse (Jun 8, 2015)

Karnon said:


> All because to tell someone they're enormous and it's not beautiful and we won't treat your type-2 diabetes or your arthritis is apparently awful.



1. Has anyone succeeded in getting smokers removed from the NHS, or told that they were not entitled to treatment for COPD or lung cancer?
2. There are many more variables involved in the two conditions you listed (type 2 diabetes, arthritis) than weight. My boss is skinny as a rail and has severe arthritis, to the point where she has to receive chemotherapy infusions -- which weaken her immune system -- in order to stop the damage her type of arthritis would otherwise keep causing.

And actually, yeah, if a drug addict is kept healthy -- whether it is something like methadone, suboxone, or needle exchange programs -- they are not out spreading diseases to the rest of the population. You'd be utterly shocked, I think, at how many addicts to very hard drugs are functioning members of society. Yet alcohol, a well-known life-wrecker, is legal unless you live in a country literally run by Muslim law, and others in this thread have discussed how cigarette smokers have a tremendous stigma nowadays (kindly keep out of the doorway, please, because I have to pass through that door and I'm violently allergic to tobacco) despite the fact that tobacco can be harder to quit than heroin. But I would tell the tobacco addict to stand in a way such that their smoke is not blowing in my face, and I stay out of cigar shops, hookah bars, and the like, and yet I do not tell them to quit. It is a severe addiction, physiologically and psychologically, and I have even bought my good friend cigarettes during hard financial times because it helps her do the menial jobs that keep her and her permanently disabled husband alive. It is not for me to judge other people's survival mechanisms, and I support a harm-reduction approach (e.g. the needle exchanges I mentioned) rather than throwing the person into the for-profit prison system taking over the US so they can detox in complete misery.

That is a true thing. As long as the person is not directly harming another person with their pot, hallucinogen, hard drug, alcohol, tobacco, or whatever (like, spending your kid's food money on meth, then yes, I'd call child services if I knew this to be true), I am not going to say "Do not do this" because it won't do any damn good anyway. That is another true thing I have discovered in life! I will say "Please stand over there" to a friend lighting up, and I'll stay out of places where people want a peaceful smoke. There are also many more medicinal marijuana users than will admit to doing this (in places where it is not legal for medical use), and since I'm not their doctor, I can't tell by looking at them whether they really have excruciating pain conditions; you certainly can't tell by looking at me that I do. I tell an editing client "The goddamn comma goes right the fuck here, you pillock" (without the swears) but I can't reason someone out of a drug addiction.

Poor people, by the way, have much more fatty, cheap fast food available to them than quinoa salads with arugula under a light vinaigrette. Look up "food desert." It's not just the amount of food you take in, it's the _kind_ of food you take in. How many pounds of broccoli can a senior citizen, especially one who is already fat, carry home on the bus? "Food deserts" are real things and they are a cause of some of the harm done via obesity.

@DawnMachine  - It is sadly possible to be allergic to tobacco. I can't even wear perfumes that use the tobacco flower as an ingredient. It's that bad.


----------



## Bronchitis that Lingers (Jun 8, 2015)

NobleGreyHorse said:


> Poor people, by the way, have much more fatty, cheap fast food available to them than quinoa salads with arugula under a light vinaigrette. Look up "food desert." It's not just the amount of food you take in, it's the _kind_ of food you take in. How many pounds of broccoli can a senior citizen, especially one who is already fat, carry home on the bus? "Food deserts" are real things and they are a cause of some of the harm done via obesity.
> 
> @DawnMachine  - It is sadly possible to be allergic to tobacco. I can't even wear perfumes that use the tobacco flower as an ingredient. It's that bad.


You bring up a very good point that a lot of people (myself included) forget about. I've personally never lived in a food desert, I've spent all 23 years of my life in cities, and it's easy for me to take a health food market or even a halfway decent supermarket up the road for granted. I know McDonald's are often the closest thing to a person's house in some areas, let alone some people just have no idea how to cook because they never learned, and a one dollar hot and spicy and a soda for every meal seems more economically feasible than buying 20 dollars of groceries to last the week. A lot of it has to do with location and how the person was raised.


----------



## Boundman (Jun 8, 2015)

NobleGreyHorse said:


> 1. Has anyone succeeded in getting smokers removed from the NHS, or told that they were not entitled to treatment for COPD or lung cancer?
> 2. There are many more variables involved in the two conditions you listed (type 2 diabetes, arthritis) than weight. My boss is skinny as a rail and has severe arthritis, to the point where she has to receive chemotherapy infusions -- which weaken her immune system -- in order to stop the damage her type of arthritis would otherwise keep causing..



Not yet, but there is definitely pressure building to do such a thing. Considering the way the NHS is now, it definitely will be soon. Which I'm fine with, you make the choice to smoke or eat shit or take drugs, no-one else should take the brunt of your continued choices. If someone said they want to quit and they're trying to quit, that's when I think it's fair for others to give them a hand.



NobleGreyHorse said:


> And actually, yeah, if a drug addict is kept healthy -- whether it is something like methadone, suboxone, or needle exchange programs -- they are not out spreading diseases to the rest of the population. You'd be utterly shocked, I think, at how many addicts to very hard drugs are functioning members of society. Yet alcohol, a well-known life-wrecker, is legal unless you live in a country literally run by Muslim law, and others in this thread have discussed how cigarette smokers have a tremendous stigma nowadays (kindly keep out of the doorway, please, because I have to pass through that door and I'm violently allergic to tobacco) despite the fact that tobacco can be harder to quit than heroin. But I would tell the tobacco addict to stand in a way such that their smoke is not blowing in my face, and I stay out of cigar shops, hookah bars, and the like, and yet I do not tell them to quit. It is a severe addiction, physiologically and psychologically, and I have even bought my good friend cigarettes during hard financial times because it helps her do the menial jobs that keep her and her permanently disabled husband alive. It is not for me to judge other people's survival mechanisms, and I support a harm-reduction approach (e.g. the needle exchanges I mentioned) rather than throwing the person into the for-profit prison system taking over the US so they can detox in complete misery.



Getting back to "beauty at any size" and stigma, I'm not against people making choices. Far from it. I'm against the glorification of choices that should ultimately be stigmatised by society. You wanna eat shit or shoot up? Fine, but accept the stigma placed on you if you do. Stigmatise bad choices like eating loads or doing smack through the eyes, that way people stop before they even start because they don't want the stigma.

If you do anything in excess, I have no sympathy for you, whether it be drugs or alcohol or food. People have a responsibility to moderate their intake of things, even if they're using it to cope. If they say they want off then great, give them a hand. But if they continue down a path they've been informed of, then they have no-one to blame but themselves.



NobleGreyHorse said:


> That is a true thing. As long as the person is not directly harming another person with their pot, hallucinogen, hard drug, alcohol, tobacco, or whatever (like, spending your kid's food money on meth, then yes, I'd call child services if I knew this to be true), I am not going to say "Do not do this" because it won't do any damn good anyway. That is another true thing I have discovered in life! I will say "Please stand over there" to a friend lighting up, and I'll stay out of places where people want a peaceful smoke. There are also many more medicinal marijuana users than will admit to doing this (in places where it is not legal for medical use), and since I'm not their doctor, I can't tell by looking at them whether they really have excruciating pain conditions; you certainly can't tell by looking at me that I do. I tell an editing client "The goddamn comma goes right the fuck here, you pillock" (without the swears) but I can't reason someone out of a drug addiction.



I live in Britain, if you do things (like eat or smoke or drink) to the extent where you require medical help, that does directly harm everyone else. The money spent on that liposuction surgery could be used to treat cancer or make sure a hospital has the anaesthetics to help the person in a car crash, the money spent on the lung transplant could go to someone with serious lung issues. If these things were private, and they wanted to go out and eat McDonalds every day then pay for private liposuction, then I wouldn't care. Those who do these things in excess (where I'd place the stigma), do affect other people in a big way.



NobleGreyHorse said:


> Poor people, by the way, have much more fatty, cheap fast food available to them than quinoa salads with arugula under a light vinaigrette. Look up "food desert." It's not just the amount of food you take in, it's the _kind_ of food you take in. How many pounds of broccoli can a senior citizen, especially one who is already fat, carry home on the bus? "Food deserts" are real things and they are a cause of some of the harm done via obesity.



I agree with this, if someone is in circumstances out of their control then obviously they should be accomodated for. I think where we each respectively draw the line on that is different however.


----------



## Marvin (Jun 8, 2015)

AnOminous said:


> There's nothing more despised than a smoker these days, and no habit that more people will not openly criticize someone for, even (especially) their friends and family.  And the rate of smoking has sharply declined as it has been increasingly stigmatized.  It's not like the fact that it's bad for you is recent news.  However, the social stigma and actual legislation and regulation burdening the choice to smoke is.


Oh, no, you're definitely right. Smokers get seriously dogged on. And that has produced measurable benefits for the US, as far as lower smoking rates go. But at the expense of being assholish to smokers.

My big point is that being fat is a negative indulgence that people can observe visually, as opposed to smoking or drinking, which isn't immediately apparent. And the people criticizing fat people aren't necessarily that healthy themselves. I think people would be a lot less shitty to fat people if everyone had a "health score" on their forehead.


Karnon said:


> What do you do when you have a drug addict who's happy? Would you leave them be too?


Yes. A family member of mine has been a long term heroin user. They're very much aware of the risks. They've been pestered for years about it and have been in jail for it and are still going strong. There's not more I can do, aside from drop them from my life.

Like @NobleGreyHorse, I very much favor harm reduction, things like safe injection sites. It's way more cost efficient way of reducing the costs of addiction on society.


Karnon said:


> These are both things that are unhealthy addictions, if you place stigma on the addictions, you dissuade people from it.


Eh, in practice? I don't know if stigmatizing addicts does all that much. It's comparable to abstinence-only sex education.


----------



## SpessCaptain (Jun 8, 2015)

I think that everyone wants to be a good person.
Those who say otherwise are edgelords.


----------



## Bronchitis that Lingers (Jun 8, 2015)

Valiant said:


> I think that everyone wants to be a good person.
> Those who say otherwise are edgelords.


I'm on the fence about this. Some people do want to watch the world burn (and not just start a flame in your heart) to mirror the loathing they have on the inside. Then on the other hand, good and evil are just opinions, clearly Hitler believed he was doing a "good" thing, so that raises an entirely different question about the definition of "good".


----------



## RepQuest (Jun 8, 2015)

Valiant said:


> I think that everyone wants to be a good person.
> Those who say otherwise are edgelords.


Likewise, those who claim to be "bad" or "evil" themselves are edgelords.


----------



## Joan Nyan (Jun 20, 2015)

Don't stop questioning yourself. If a lot of people disagree with your beliefs, you might want to listen to them and consider what they have to say.  SJWs seem to have a huge problem with this.

also

Most events that hurt one group of people help another and vis versa. Almost nothing is inherently "good" or "bad". Things like the holocaust were bad but things like that are few and far between. As a hopefully not too controversial example, some people hate Walmart for driving small businesses out, but there are also single mothers on welfare who rely on Walmart's low prices to feed their kids.


----------



## Boundman (Jun 20, 2015)

Jon-Nyan said:


> Don't stop questioning yourself. If a lot of people disagree with your beliefs, you might want to listen to them and consider what they have to say.  SJWs seem to have a huge problem with this.



Completely agree with this, a lot of people take them not being convinced by others as strength in their arguments and that they're correct, when in actuality they're right in some areas and wrong in others. Those who question themselves and correct those things will find they're much more well balanced than those who are content to just be as they are now.


----------



## autisticdragonkin (Jun 20, 2015)

Jon-Nyan said:


> Don't stop questioning yourself. If a lot of people disagree with your beliefs, you might want to listen to them and consider what they have to say.  SJWs seem to have a huge problem with this.


Your mind is a prison. If you don't constantly try to avoid falling into problematic modes of thought by methodical analysis you will get wrong beliefs and they will hurt you. That is the basis of science


----------



## Tragi-Chan (Jul 5, 2015)

Jon-Nyan said:


> Don't stop questioning yourself. If a lot of people disagree with your beliefs, you might want to listen to them and consider what they have to say.  SJWs seem to have a huge problem with this.


This is absolutely a rule I try to live by. If I believe something, it's important to ask why I believe it, and if my belief is right.

I also believe that no one is as clever as they think they are, and there's no point trying to change people's minds on this.


----------



## nad7155 (Jul 5, 2015)

Maybe it's the pessimist in me, but I really think there will never be racial/religious harmony.

Too many deep wounds, too many who will never look ahead, and too many playing it for fame/money.

"Peace on earth" is a nice ideal, but human nature will never let it happen.


----------



## AnOminous (Jul 5, 2015)

nad7155 said:


> Maybe it's the pessimist in me, but I really think there will never be racial/religious harmony.



I think there will be.

But then we'll find something even dumber to hate each other over and we'll have Armageddon over that instead.


----------



## Boundman (Jul 5, 2015)

nad7155 said:


> Maybe it's the pessimist in me, but I really think there will never be racial/religious harmony.
> 
> Too many deep wounds, too many who will never look ahead, and too many playing it for fame/money.
> 
> "Peace on earth" is a nice ideal, but human nature will never let it happen.



I like to think people can at least learn and recognise the pattern and tactics of those who use the past to get what they want.


----------



## Marvin (Jul 5, 2015)

nad7155 said:


> Maybe it's the pessimist in me, but I really think there will never be racial/religious harmony.
> 
> Too many deep wounds, too many who will never look ahead, and too many playing it for fame/money.
> 
> "Peace on earth" is a nice ideal, but human nature will never let it happen.


In the United States, I think racial harmony is being held back mostly by economic issues. I think those issues are being ground down slowly. We're not there yet, and continual vigilance is necessary, but we're constantly making gradual progress.

And religious conflicts aren't a big problem here. Religion occasionally interacts with politics, but I think that's more of a cultural thing about conservatives than something inherently tied to religion. (i.e. being a god-fearing person is a buzzword, like being tough on crime and wanting to kick out all the illegals)


----------



## nad7155 (Jul 5, 2015)

Karnon said:


> I like to think people can at least learn and recognise the pattern and tactics of those who use the past to get what they want.




That's the thing.

They don't.


----------



## Marvin (Jul 5, 2015)

nad7155 said:


> That's the thing.
> 
> They don't.


Eh, that's not really supported by the evidence.

People are always improving. It might not seem that way from a really close up view of things, but if you look at the big picture, humanity is very consistently improving.


----------



## GS 281 (Jul 5, 2015)

I think we are good at solving problems, but I also think we are great at *not* managing the unintended consequences of those problems. The problem of racial inequality will be solved eventually, however I do not think that the solution will be a linear one where we plan for X and Y happens, because other factors will confound the path from X to Y. We see that when there is political, social and economic solutions employed. It has been 51 years since the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and we are where we are now. It has been almost 147 years since the ratification of the 14th Amendment and look where we are. It will take a lot of old white people dying out and a lot of young black people stepping up for there to be recognition and acceptance of equality to the point where change is engrained into the system.


----------



## Zeorus (Jul 5, 2015)

I very firmly believe that there is an inherent justice to the universe.  Even if justice is not served immediately (or even within the lifetimes of those who have been wronged), all is eventually made right.  This isn't quite the same as karma in my mind, as the fulfillment of justice doesn't always directly affect those who do evil, and is largely informed by my religious views.


----------



## hard2heart2heart (Jul 5, 2015)

It takes significantly more effort to survive being a deadbeat than it is to work a majority of entry level jobs.


----------



## Johnny Bravo (Jul 6, 2015)

As an atheist I believe there will always be religion and we should accept that. The point at which humanity is completely rid of superstition is the point when we cease to be completely human.


----------



## autisticdragonkin (Jul 6, 2015)

CuriousBystander said:


> As an atheist I believe there will always be religion and we should accept that. The point at which humanity is completely rid of superstition is the point when we cease to be completely human.


The word human when used in that way is completely meaningless and can be safely replaced with aiguguru without any change in the meaning of the sentence


----------



## Johnny Bravo (Jul 6, 2015)

autisticdragonkin said:


> The word human when used in that way is completely meaningless and can be safely replaced with aiguguru without any change in the meaning of the sentence



I think the predisposition to belief is part of our DNA. What I'm basically saying is we'd be a different species (sub-species?) if 100% of us were atheists because you'd have to change a lot about the way our minds perceive reality. We might even be cyborgs by that point. Not that that's a bad thing.


----------



## autisticdragonkin (Jul 6, 2015)

CuriousBystander said:


> I think the predisposition to belief is part of our DNA. What I'm basically saying is we'd be a different species (sub-species?) if 100% of us were atheists because you'd have to change a lot about the way our minds perceive reality. We might even be cyborgs by that point. Not that that's a bad thing.


I would say that yes what you are talking about is transhumanism but that transhumanism has existed for millenia beginning in its first recorded form in greek philosophy. By using empirical data to determine our beliefs among other things we have already become very distinct from the earlier humans perhaps enough to to consider it a sort of memetic speciation. We are already posthumans who have deluded ourselves into thinking that we are humans


----------



## Johnny Bravo (Jul 6, 2015)

autisticdragonkin said:


> I would say that yes what you are talking about is transhumanism but that transhumanism has existed for millenia beginning in its first recorded form in greek philosophy. By using empirical data to determine our beliefs among other things we have already become very distinct from the earlier humans perhaps enough to to consider it a sort of memetic speciation. We are already posthumans who have deluded ourselves into thinking that we are humans



The majority of the human race is still religious. You're talking about a very small percentage of our species. Even among those with access to the internet and modern science the religious groups are still dominant.


----------



## autisticdragonkin (Jul 6, 2015)

CuriousBystander said:


> The majority of the human race is still religious. You're talking about a very small percentage of our species. Even among those with access to the internet and modern science the religious groups are still dominant.


But the vast majority of the human species are not hunter gatherers. The vast majority of the human species do function under a legal system. Definitely there are some humans which are more posthuman than others but virtually all of us are very different from when we were hunter gatherers in social organization


----------



## Johnny Bravo (Jul 6, 2015)

autisticdragonkin said:


> But the vast majority of the human species are not hunter gatherers. The vast majority of the human species do function under a legal system. Definitely there are some humans which are more posthuman than others but virtually all of us are very different from when we were hunter gatherers in social organization



What does being hunter gatherers have to do with being religious? Are you denying that there are religious people in 1st world countries? Or that the only people without internet access are hunter gatherers? I'm sorry, I'm not understanding. 

Come to think of it I'm skeptical of your claim that we're already transhuman. On a genetic and anatomical level we're basically the same as our ancestors pre-agriculture. I think that our discoveries of domestication and farming may have altered our brains in that we have better access to nutrition but that's not really a genetic difference. It's just our bodies operating normally under the best possible conditions.


----------



## autisticdragonkin (Jul 6, 2015)

CuriousBystander said:


> What does being hunter gatherers have to do with being religious? Are you denying that there are religious people in 1st world countries? Or that the only people without internet access are hunter gatherers? I'm sorry, I'm not understanding.
> 
> Come to think of it I'm skeptical of your claim that we're already transhuman. On a genetic and anatomical level we're basically the same as our ancestors pre-agriculture. I think that our discoveries of domestication and farming may have altered our brains in that we have better access to nutrition but that's not really a genetic difference. It's just our bodies operating normally under the best possible conditions.


I said that we were memetically transhuman. That is that although we share the same biology (I will exclude the nutritional aspect) we have evolved ways of using it that are radically different in function. That is that we have moved past our original limitations through technologies such as writing and the state.




Spoiler: http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/transhumanism









it says physical or mental limitations and we definitely have evolved beyond our mental limitations
also our physical limitations if you count medicine

EDIT: this has gone off from the original topic of religion completely


----------



## Johnny Bravo (Jul 6, 2015)

autisticdragonkin said:


> I said that we were memetically transhuman. That is that although we share the same biology (I will exclude the nutritional aspect) we have evolved ways of using it that are radically different in function. That is that we have moved past our original limitations through technologies such as writing and the state.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I still don't think we can overcome religious thought without a radical change in the structre of our brains. We're pattern seeking creatures to a fault. We're also driven to conform and seek social bonds, even if doing so requries us to behave irrartionally, and most of us are prone to emotional pleas and manipulation. Atheists are vulnerable to it, too. That's why I believe there will always be religion as long as there is humanity as we know it.


----------



## Sweet and Savoury (Jul 7, 2015)

That life  is inherently unfair and cruel.

There is no god, no karma and no justice. The strong do what they want and the weak endure it.


----------



## ASoulMan (Jul 7, 2015)

That humanity is slowly fucking over the Earth.


----------



## chimpburgers (Jul 8, 2015)

There are some people who no matter how much you try you'll never be able to get through to them because of their confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance. Try showing these people all the raw data, charts, statistics, and evidence you can find that supports your claim and that completely disproves what they believe in, and no matter what you do, they will still cling onto their beliefs and try to make up all sorts of straw man arguments and ways to spin things so that they think that you made those facts up or that they're the ones that know everything and not you. I run into this all the time when I'm trying to have a debate with someone whether it be on another forum, YouTube or in emails.

The only way that they can ever have their minds changed is if they reach that conclusion on their own because they decided to as a result of their own personal experiences, and even then, there will still be some that will get themselves fucked over and over again and not have a clue that they are being lied to or conned. I believe that everyone has experienced the Dunning-Kruger effect at one point or another.


----------



## AnOminous (Jul 8, 2015)

dollarpennypincher said:


> There are some people who no matter how much you try you'll never be able to get through to them because of their confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance.



I used to get frustrated and try to argue with them and shit.  Now I just laugh at them, or if I feel like a  and it's possible, set them up to fail and laugh at them even more when they do.


----------



## Ian Brandon Anderson (Jul 8, 2015)

Hatred breeds hatred.

If I hate something, it makes it so much easier for it to hate me. Vice versa as well.


----------



## Oglooger (Jul 9, 2015)

Mankind is both evil and good.
Mankind is evil since it must consume all, become more evil by creating more weapons and destroy all that opposes it. But Man can be good, because their are individuals that detest violence, try to compromise in peace and find ways to limit it's gluttony on resources. but this good will always be in minority and be taken down by the evil men who want their gluttonous power over their long term survival and the survival of those who serve his food in silver platter.
The good men must find new homes in space since we are almost sucking this planet dry from resources thanks to overpopulation and find better alternative forms of fuel. but the evil man would rather keep his profits on petroleum.
One day, Humanity will reach the stars and keep expanding over the universe. and even if we will be a massive soulless empire, their will still be a sense of peace and humanity on those small individuals who live simple lives.


----------



## Olhelm (Jul 9, 2015)

There is goodness in man. There is also loathing. One cannot exist without the other.


----------



## autisticdragonkin (Jul 9, 2015)

people always beg the question when it comes to ethical value unless explicitly attempting to avoid it


----------



## Roger Rabbit (Jul 9, 2015)

I consider racism to only be used as an argument ender and nothing else. Somebody says something the other person doesn't like, they say they were racist, conversation over.


----------



## RepQuest (Jul 9, 2015)

RogerRabbit1988 said:


> I consider racism to only be used as an argument ender and nothing else. Somebody says something the other person doesn't like, they say they were racist, conversation over.


That depends on the subject.


----------



## nad7155 (Jul 9, 2015)

Marvin said:


> look at the big picture, humanity is very consistently improving.



In some ways, yes.

But if you look at the bigger picture, nothing changes.

Most people in power will abuse it in some way.

From the small town cop getting free coffee, to the career politician getting kickbacks.


----------



## autisticdragonkin (Jul 9, 2015)

nad7155 said:


> In some ways, yes.
> 
> But if you look at the bigger picture, nothing changes.
> 
> ...


If you look at the big picture nothing can be said of humanity. We have been around for so little time that it is impossible to make any accurate judgement. Although many people might claim that 12000 years is a long time it is infinitesimal in geological time. Although we may in the year 2015 be mature as a species it is very unlikely that we are so and in order to claim so is to use an extremely small sample size which is too small to have any use. Maybe after 1000 years of no significant difference from 2015 we could say that humanity has reached a stable social orientation but even that would be a little to impulsive. We can never know whether we are at the end of history and to attempt to claim that we are or even to claim any knowledge of the end of history is a narcissistic manifestation of the frailty of the human psyche. Accepting that one doesn't know and can never know is the important thing. We may never know whether we are improving or staying the same because both of those statements cannot be properly supported.


Spoiler: long nietzsche quote



Man is a rope stretched between the animal and the Superman--a rope over an
abyss.

A dangerous crossing, a dangerous wayfaring, a dangerous looking-back, a
dangerous trembling and halting.

What is great in man is that he is a bridge and not a goal: what is
lovable in man is that he is an OVER-GOING and a DOWN-GOING.

I love those that know not how to live except as down-goers, for they are
the over-goers.

I love the great despisers, because they are the great adorers, and arrows
of longing for the other shore.

I love those who do not first seek a reason beyond the stars for going down
and being sacrifices, but sacrifice themselves to the earth, that the earth
of the Superman may hereafter arrive.

I love him who liveth in order to know, and seeketh to know in order that
the Superman may hereafter live. Thus seeketh he his own down-going.

I love him who laboureth and inventeth, that he may build the house for the
Superman, and prepare for him earth, animal, and plant: for thus seeketh
he his own down-going.

I love him who loveth his virtue: for virtue is the will to down-going,
and an arrow of longing.

I love him who reserveth no share of spirit for himself, but wanteth to be
wholly the spirit of his virtue: thus walketh he as spirit over the
bridge.

I love him who maketh his virtue his inclination and destiny: thus, for
the sake of his virtue, he is willing to live on, or live no more.

I love him who desireth not too many virtues. One virtue is more of a
virtue than two, because it is more of a knot for one's destiny to cling
to.

I love him whose soul is lavish, who wanteth no thanks and doth not give
back: for he always bestoweth, and desireth not to keep for himself.

I love him who is ashamed when the dice fall in his favour, and who then
asketh: "Am I a dishonest player?"--for he is willing to succumb.

I love him who scattereth golden words in advance of his deeds, and always
doeth more than he promiseth: for he seeketh his own down-going.

I love him who justifieth the future ones, and redeemeth the past ones:
for he is willing to succumb through the present ones.

I love him who chasteneth his God, because he loveth his God: for he must
succumb through the wrath of his God.

I love him whose soul is deep even in the wounding, and may succumb through
a small matter: thus goeth he willingly over the bridge.

I love him whose soul is so overfull that he forgetteth himself, and all
things are in him: thus all things become his down-going.

I love him who is of a free spirit and a free heart: thus is his head only
the bowels of his heart; his heart, however, causeth his down-going.

I love all who are like heavy drops falling one by one out of the dark
cloud that lowereth over man: they herald the coming of the lightning, and
succumb as heralds.

Lo, I am a herald of the lightning, and a heavy drop out of the cloud: the
lightning, however, is the SUPERMAN.--


----------



## OtterParty (Jul 10, 2015)

α > β > ω


----------



## Holdek (Jul 10, 2015)

nad7155 said:


> From the small town cop getting free coffee,



That's almost the definition of "small picture."


----------



## Marvin (Jul 10, 2015)

autisticdragonkin said:


> Although many people might claim that 12000 years is a long time it is infinitesimal in geographical time.


No one gives a shit about rocks.


----------



## Ruin (Jul 10, 2015)

Nihilism is fucking stupid. It's the philosophical equivalent of shitting yourself and doing nothing.


----------



## autisticdragonkin (Jul 10, 2015)

Ruin said:


> Nihilism is fucking stupid. It's the philosophical equivalent of shitting yourself and doing nothing.


Nihilism is caused by an overcompensation to begging the question in value. One realizes that previously one has not properly supported ones value judgements and instead of attempting to give we supported value judgements one simply refuses to make value judgements.


----------



## DuskEngine (Jul 10, 2015)

Ruin said:


> Nihilism is fucking stupid. It's the philosophical equivalent of shitting yourself and doing nothing.


If you're a nihilist and you haven't killed yourself, you're not a nihilist.


----------



## YI 457 (Jul 10, 2015)

Spoiler: This.


----------



## DuskEngine (Jul 10, 2015)

You and I are things made out of parts.


----------



## AnOminous (Jul 10, 2015)

Ruin said:


> Nihilism is fucking stupid. It's the philosophical equivalent of shitting yourself and doing nothing.



Nihilism is an entirely rational analysis of the fact that there is no objective basis or intrinsic meaning to existence.

I suppose it would be stupid to make that the _entire_ basis of a philosophy, but it is certainly not stupid to address this issue.



DawnMachine said:


> If you're a nihilist and you haven't killed yourself, you're not a nihilist.



That doesn't make sense.  If you're an actual nihilist, then it doesn't matter in the least what you do.  Hedonism would be one response to the lack of objective meaning.

Of course, most people actually calling themselves "nihilists" think it's about dressing up in black and whining about how dismal everything is.  Perhaps those people should kill themselves.

Nietzsche is often accused of being a nihilist, largely because of his edgelord followers, most of whom don't even understand him.  He was actually an anti-nihilist, but he grappled with the problems presented by the issue.

Perhaps the kind of "nihilist" you mean is someone like Cioran, the kind of nihilism that could be summed up as antinatalism.  However, as Cioran himself points out, if the problem is existence, suicide doesn't solve it.  Simply having been born is the problem, and that doesn't go away with suicide.


----------



## drtoboggan (Jul 10, 2015)

I believe in science and reason as means of making sense of the apparent chaos to the universe. I also strongly believe religions' sole purpose is a tool for comfort, not an end in and of itself. However, if religion does yield some deeper answer, it warrants another look. I have yet to find this though. 
Outside of that, I don't believe in a universal meaning of life. For now it appears subjective, a personal thing. For me, it is the acquisition of knowledge, humanism, and happiness.


----------



## DuskEngine (Jul 10, 2015)

AnOminous said:


> Simply having been born is the problem, and that doesn't go away with suicide.



I was thinking more along the lines of people like Zapffe, who says that consciousness was an evolutionary mistake and advocates voluntary extinction.


----------



## AnOminous (Jul 10, 2015)

DawnMachine said:


> I was thinking more along the lines of people like Zapffe, who says that consciousness was an evolutionary mistake and advocates voluntary extinction.



This doesn't necessarily require or even imply suicide, though it certainly strongly suggests not reproducing.


----------



## Holdek (Jul 10, 2015)

DawnMachine said:


> I was thinking more along the lines of people like Zapffe, who says that consciousness was an evolutionary mistake and advocates voluntary extinction.


Why would we want to do that?  If it's an evolutionary mistake then we'll be wiped out anyway.


----------



## Save Goober (Jul 11, 2015)

Saying something is an evolutionary mistake is stupid anyway. Evolution doesn't make mistakes. Something either adapts or it doesn't. It's not really a value judgement, and evolution is not an entity that cares about the security of the planet, its environment, personal happiness, etc.

I guess most of what I consider to be true was covered on the first page, but I consider very little things to be objectively true. Humanity just seems so diverse to me. You can't even say something so simple as "all humans need sunlight" because there are people who are allergic to the sun. All people need oxygen, I guess? Such truths are boring, but perhaps that's the nature of objective truth. And anyway I'm still not entirely convinced we're not all living in a computer simulation or something.
I do particularly agree with what @NobleGreyHorse said about sociopaths, I think they are a real issue to society. But at the same time, not always. Also


KingGeedorah said:


> Child porn is awful. Fuck those people who make that shit.


----------



## DuskEngine (Jul 11, 2015)

Holdek said:


> Why would we want to do that?  If it's an evolutionary mistake then we'll be wiped out anyway.



That's not exactly what I meant, I explained it poorly. 

Consciousness was a mistake because it created a type of being that is unable to be truly 'conscious' but is also unable to tolerate knowing itself as a purely deterministic machine, is what he meant. So it creates the need for self-deception and absurdity.

 He didn't think it was a 'mistake' in a Darwinian sense.


----------



## autisticdragonkin (Jul 11, 2015)

We cannot make a statement about whether existence is good or bad because we only have experience of existence. So don't be afraid of death and enjoy life.


----------



## Holdek (Jul 11, 2015)

DawnMachine said:


> That's not exactly what I meant, I explained it poorly.
> 
> Consciousness was a mistake because it created a type of being that is unable to be truly 'conscious' but is also unable to tolerate knowing itself as a purely deterministic machine, is what he meant. So it creates the need for self-deception and absurdity.
> 
> He didn't think it was a 'mistake' in a Darwinian sense.


I think that's more an unforeseen consequence of our development past caveman stage, that we have the safety and time to sit around and ruminate existentially.


----------



## dorkin44 (Jul 11, 2015)

Never underestimate to power of kindness. 

I believe that being a good person with what you have will pull you through most situations. Those who cannot see past what you are to experience who you are, are people who aren't worth getting upset about. You still have to be alert - don't be naive kindness, be attentive kindness, since some people will try to take advantage of you. But these people are not everywhere and genuine kindness really does pay off. You will be a happier person for it, as cheesy as it sounds.

In addition I believe that in most situations, people always have something to bring to the table. We all have a role in our lives, something that we truly enjoy, something that truly makes us feel complete. Pursue that. It may not seem clear at first how it fits into the big picture. But take who you are, in your entirety, embrace it, and I believe you will find something that you truly enjoy and gives you purpose to your life.


----------



## Save Goober (Jul 11, 2015)

DawnMachine said:


> That's not exactly what I meant, I explained it poorly.
> 
> Consciousness was a mistake because it created a type of being that is unable to be truly 'conscious' but is also unable to tolerate knowing itself as a purely deterministic machine, is what he meant. So it creates the need for self-deception and absurdity.
> 
> He didn't think it was a 'mistake' in a Darwinian sense.


Hm, that's interesting. I more or less think of myself as a purely deterministic machine and don't really believe in free will and such but it doesn't really stop me from thinking and acting like I have choices. I don't know if anyone ever could. But I feel like it's more out of habit than existential angst.


----------



## autisticdragonkin (Jul 11, 2015)

meltychocolate said:


> Hm, that's interesting. I more or less think of myself as a purely deterministic machine and don't really believe in free will and such but it doesn't really stop me from thinking and acting like I have choices. I don't know if anyone ever could. But I feel like it's more out of habit than existential angst.


I would say that the mistake is that many people care that they are deterministic machines


----------



## Olhelm (Jul 14, 2015)

Circles don't exist.


----------



## ZehnBoat (Jul 14, 2015)

Wolfenmaus said:


> Circles don't exist.


all shapes don't exist really, they are abstract ideas, like numbers

out of everything that can be known:
there are many facts that can never be known to a person (person in this case means any creature with the ability to know) in a specific place
there are many facts that can never be known to a person in a specific time.
and even with all these places accounted for.
there will be facts left unknown forever, and we can never know how much that is.


----------



## c-no (Jul 16, 2015)

I do believe there is something greater or higher than us. That thing could range from God (if one does believe in deities) to nature to the universe itself. By higher or greater than us, I mean there is something that could always be there even if we were to die off. The universe was around long before man was around (whether one believes we were created or evolved from a common ancestor shared with chimpanzee's, the universe has been around longer than we have).


----------



## DNJACK (Jul 16, 2015)

I consider my dick to be True

suck it faggots.

On another note, I believe in honor, the DIY ethics, being nice to people being nice to you, all that.


----------



## BlueArmedDevil (Jul 16, 2015)

That my brain is simply the pilot of a self repairing, adaptable bio-mech and hopefully one day I will get the chance to place it in a metal body


----------



## ZehnBoat (Jul 16, 2015)

the universe does not give you purpose nor take it away
purpose is given to you by yourself and others, and it is filtered by you.
purpose is the most important thing you have,
and to give it to someone else willingly is worse than saying you don't have a purpose.

now, being a human. there are social contracts and the like.
you will have to bend to someone else, but that's okay.
it's part of being a social animal.
people care about society to care about themselves
and societies care about it's members to care about itself.

you must put yourself first to care about society.
it's a strange interaction.


----------



## kookerpie (Jul 25, 2015)

I believe in the Illuminati and the idea that they can create undetectable mind controlled slaves.


----------



## autisticdragonkin (Jul 27, 2015)

When you face a situation that arises passion within you hold back and calm down. Your feelings aren't bad but if you jump to making a decision without proper thought then there is a good probability that you will not be making the right one. Once you are calm look over the evidence and then make a sober decision. If your decision goes against your feelings then it doesn't mean that you were wrong and are stupid but rather that you managed to build up the strength to overcome a destructive path. If your decision goes with with your feelings then it doesn't mean that you were right all along but rather it just means that by chance the largest path in your way was the correct one, your accomplishment was when you figured out which path was the correct one.


----------



## LN 910 (Nov 3, 2018)

I believe that is possible for us to not only cheat ageing and death but to cheat any hypothetical end of the universe. We've been lucky enough to come this far so why not go all the way?


----------



## AF 802 (Nov 4, 2018)

Soros is a problem and needs to be stopped and/or him dying.


----------



## Glad I couldn't help (Nov 7, 2018)

Some threads sould be nerco'd.

More seriously: There are always trade-offs ins this world. Even if something is a net positive (which I believe also exist), there are always cost to it.


----------



## TiggerNits (Nov 7, 2018)

If a chick has been diagnosed with any mental/personality illness, malady, disorder, defect or syndrome, she will only get worse and find a way to blame it on you and you need to get out immediately. Nothing, no pill, no counsel and certainly not you will be able to fix her


----------



## Guts Gets Some (Nov 9, 2018)

That I have the most ironic luck of any human being on planet Earth.

Seriously, I feel like I'm in a badly written fanfic most of my life.


----------



## 妛壥彁閠 (Jun 6, 2022)

This sentence is false.


----------

