I don’t know about you, but my goal here is to get everyone to have the same ideals I do.
Sexuality is a survival mechanism, not a product of luxury.
You must have misunderstood something. Probably you do not know what human “luxury” really means. In addition, sexuality is not only a “survival mechanism”.
Same with communication and emotions.
No. You must have misunderstood something. Probably you do not know what human “communication” and “emotions” really mean. In addition, communication and emotions are also not only a “survival mechanism” or two survival mechanisms.
Rich people did not sit down and decide to make up emotions one day.
Nobody said that rich people did “sit down and decide to make up emotions one day”. You must have misunderstood something. …
Arminius: Arminius:[size=120]I suggest to reform ILP and to call it „IL“ with the following eight subforums:
(1) ILF (“I Love Fun”),
(2) ILG (“I Love Gossip”),
(3) ILL (“I Love Lies”),
(4) ILN 1 (“I love Nietzsche”),
(5) ILN 2 (“I love Nonsense”),
(6) ILN 3 (“I Love Nothing”),
(7) ILP (“I Love Philosophy”) (that means: averagely merely 12.5% [1/8] are really interested in philosophy),
(8) ILSC (I Love Social Criticism).[/size]I don’t know about you, but my goal here is to get everyone to have the same ideals I do.
And what are your “ideals”?
Here is an example that shows how much a person can love philosophy:
I was in prison only once for prostitution. I sold myself so i could study philosophy. In prisn, one month, i did not experoence anything, because i was in with the blacks, and nobody bothered me in spite of my pretty boy status. I was not queered, nor did i become anyone’s bitch, because i knew how to play the game, learned from the streets. I lost my job with traffic violations when they found out, but had the whole affair ex-punged after 3 years because i was considered a minor at the time. I was arrested several times after that but never served time for them. I became very claustrophobic after this, and even to this day, developed all kids of phobias. I developed a very deep respect for the law there after. Thank You.
And what are your “ideals”?
My ideals, is that humans are mostly retards, and they need their DNA changed.
Here is an example that shows how much a person can love philosophy:
Orbie:I was in prison only once for prostitution. I sold myself so i could study philosophy. In prisn, one month, i did not experoence anything, because i was in with the blacks, and nobody bothered me in spite of my pretty boy status. I was not queered, nor did i become anyone’s bitch, because i knew how to play the game, learned from the streets. I lost my job with traffic violations when they found out, but had the whole affair ex-punged after 3 years because i was considered a minor at the time. I was arrested several times after that but never served time for them. I became very claustrophobic after this, and even to this day, developed all kids of phobias. I developed a very deep respect for the law there after. Thank You.
Philosophy is not something you need money to study. Philosophy is something you craft on your own volition. Not read long books to parrot others.
Arminius:And what are your “ideals”?
My ideals, is that humans are mostly retards, and they need their DNA changed.
From another thread:
When it comes to distinguish the nature of human beings from the nature of other living beings, then human nature is human culture/s. Although it is difficult to say whether there is one human culture or several human cultures, I would say, if I had to refer to merely one human culture, that a human being is a luxury being. In another thread I said:
The luxury is a very special phenomenon, especially for human beings. Human beings are luxury beings. They make their artificial island of luxury in the sea of nature. Evolution is not just about adaptation to nature, but also about distancing from nature, thus about the luxury islands.Only human beings (thus no other living beings) are able to distance or disassociate themselves so much from nature. Humans live on islands of luxury. They have their human bubbles like hulls / shells, caves, huts / cottages, houses, beyond that: castles, churches / cathedrals, cities, city states, states, nations, empires, global empires … and so forth. Because they are much more spiritual / mental / intellectual than other creatures, they have not only a bodily but also a spiritual immune system. This spiritual immune system is the main cause of the enormous luxury and the characteristic feature of human culture/s. Because of the fact that there are many different spiritual immune systems of humans possible, one should rather speak about several human cultures and not about one human culture.
project2501:So culture is the same as nature?
No. Culture it is not the same as nature, but it is a part of nature. I said: “When it comes to distinguish the nature of human beings from the nature of other living beings, then human nature is human culture/s.” That does not mean that nature and culture are the same. They are similar, not the same. There are analogies between them.
Naturally human beings are animal beings, but culturally human beings are not animal beings but human beings (just becaue of their culture). Of course, there are feedbacks between nature and culture, thus also between human nature and human culture. But if it comes to distinguish the nature of human beings from the nature of other living beings, then human nature is human culture/s. And one of the main features of human culture/s is luxury.
Prismatic567: Arminius:Naturally human beings are animal beings, but culturally human beings are not animal beings but human beings (just becaue of their culture). Of course, there are feedbacks between nature and culture, thus also between human nature and human culture.
But if it comes to distinguish the nature of human beings from the nature of other living beings, then human nature is human culture/s. And one of the main features of human culture/s is luxury.In another perspective;
If human nature is 100%, it can also be represented as the combination of,
98% animal nature + 2% specific human nature..That is also my estimation and assessment. But these 2% are not really few - we know it, especially from genetics.
Prismatic567:Despite the significant difference in the external expressions of humans as distinct from other living things, I think the above combination is applicable to describe human nature.
For example, if we were to transplant that 2% of human properties to our nearest primates, they would like to be very similar to humans in time.
At present primates/dolphins already have some degree of culture that are similar to humans, i.e. the use of tool, games, language, deliberated evil, etc.The use of tools that do not belong to the own body are alrerady a prestage of luxury; the use of language, if it is close to the value of the human language, as well; games do all mammals have (maybe it is a pre-prestage of luxury). B.t.w.: Luxury can be measured by the degree of insulation. The more living beings are able to live on an own “island” (meant as a metaphor!), the more they are luxury beings. Or, in other words, the more living beings are able to behave against the Darwinistic evolution, the more they are luxury beings. Insulations give those beings a relative (!) independence of adaptation to nature. The adaptation to nature has not vanished but has been added by dissociation of nature. And the only living being that has achieved this independence in a sufficient extent is the human being.
The question is how we value this relative (!) independence. This relative independence is caused by insulation or dissociation of nature with the main effect: luxury. And this insulation is (a) natuarlly caused by the relatively huge brain and (b) culturally caused by the huge consciousness, awareness, knowkedge, language of human beings.
That’s an interesting theme.
Humans do not completely fit in the scheme of the Darwinistic evolution theory!
In the case of the humans self-consciousness with its epiphenomenon egoism is one aspect, yes, but the main aspect is the insulation (dissociation of nature) which leads to luxury and is naturally caused by the brain. So we have (1) the brain, (2) the insulation (dissociation of nature), (3) the luxury and also the self-consciousness with its epiphenomenon egoism and many other features, but it is more the luxury that leads to the self-consciousness than it is the self-consciousness that leads to luxury. Some animals have self-consciousness in almost the degree that human children in the age of 1 to 2 years have, but these animals do not have luxury in the degree that human children in the age of 1 to 2 years have. And human children become egoistic in that typical human way (you said: “extreme”) after that age, usually when they are older than 2 years. Luxury is more a communal than a personal matter.The human development is more a communal than a personal (“individual”) development. The human development is more a cultural than a natural development, because the natural development of the humans is more (about 98%; see above) an animal development than a human development.
Naturally you need a relative large and a very complex brain, if you want to become a human being, but then, when that brain exists, your further development is more a cultural than a natural development. The huge consciousness (with its accordingly huge self-consciousness), the huge knowledge, the huge and complex language, … were naturally caused by the brain but would be totally useless, if their development were merely a natural development. The humans are humans very much more because of their cultural development than because of their natural development. Naturally humans are 98%-animals, but culturally humans are 98%-humans.
As I said (for example: here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here): Human beings are luxury beings.
Evolution is not just about adaptation to nature, to environment, but also about distancing from nature, from environment, thus about the “luxury islands”.
Human beings are the only living beings that can disassociate themselves from nature in such a dimension that they do not completely have to adapt themselves to nature, to their natural environment. They can destroy the nature just for fun. Other living beings can also have a little bit luxury, but their luxury is always embedded in their immediate nature, their natural environment. They are not able to overcome their dependence of nature. They remain living creatures in the sense of Darwinism: those that are successful have the most descendants, and those that are not successful have the less or no descendants and die out. Luxury beings are the only living beings that can show also the opposite direction: being successful and having less or no descendants (children) and beeing unsuccessful and having the most descendants (children). This two cases would immediately lead to extinction, if they were completely embedded in nature, in natural environment. In the case of human beings it does not lead to extinction, if they are in situations of independence of nature; they often are in such situations, and then It depends on human decisions whether a group of human beings or even all human beings die out or not. Humans have two natures: (1) the real nature which all other living beings also have, (2) their own nature as their culture(s) which is (are) much independend of the real nature.
So when I say “human nature is human culture/s”, then I mean that - in a pure natural sense - humans are 98%-animals; so in this sense they have a 98%-animal nature and merely a 2%-human nature, but this 2% are their culture/s. And in a pure cultural sense this relation is inversely proportional.
If humans are humans to 100%, then merely to 2% because of their nature; but to 98% because of their culture/s!
The prestage of the human luxury beings was the upright walking which leads to the possibility of using hands in many other ways than walking which leads to a more voluminous brain with very much more capacity which leads to the birth of the luxury being.
The "birth" of the human luxury beings was the use of fire which was associated with the use of language.
The "youth" of the human luxury beings was the sapientisation.
The "adulthood" of the human luxury beings began when they were left alone, thus with the Neanderthal extinction (since then there has been being merely one species of the humans).
4a) The "early adulthood" of the human luxury beings: from the Neanderthal extinction to the transition (the so-called “Neolithic Revolution”) to the agriculture.
4b) The "middle adulthood" of the human luxury beings: from the agriculture to that probable date in the future when machines will take over (=>).
4c) The "late adulthood" of the human luxury beings: from the probable date in the future when machines will have taken over to the death of the last human.
[size=90]So currently we at the stage 4b.[/size]
Humans can never be 100%-animals but “merely” 98%-animals, and humans can never be gods but godwannabes, although no 100%-godwannabes but “merely” 98%-godwannabes.
Humans are not perfect. They are not capable of being 100%-animals and also not capable of being gods.
So you are saying that humans “need their DNA changed”. Okay, but what, if they will have changed their DNA?
Arminius:Here is an example that shows how much a person can love philosophy:
Orbie:I was in prison only once for prostitution. I sold myself so i could study philosophy. In prisn, one month, i did not experoence anything, because i was in with the blacks, and nobody bothered me in spite of my pretty boy status. I was not queered, nor did i become anyone’s bitch, because i knew how to play the game, learned from the streets. I lost my job with traffic violations when they found out, but had the whole affair ex-punged after 3 years because i was considered a minor at the time. I was arrested several times after that but never served time for them. I became very claustrophobic after this, and even to this day, developed all kids of phobias. I developed a very deep respect for the law there after. Thank You.
Philosophy is not something you need money to study. Philosophy is something you craft on your own volition. Not read long books to parrot others.
I agree. But it could nevertheless be possible that Orbie loved philosophy and thought (wrongly) that he needed money to study his “true love”.
I agree. But it could nevertheless be possible that Orbie loved philosophy and thought (wrongly) that he needed money to study his “true love”.
Either Orbie is a troll, or he or she has serious mental problems to the point of needing to work something out with a therapist. Whoring your body to pay for rent is one thing…but whoring your body in order to search for philosophy…that’s something else…Especially when your local library is only a few cliques away…
So you are saying that humans “need their DNA changed”. Okay, but what, if they will have changed their DNA?
When they change their DNA, they will become more intelligient, more healthy, athletic, kind, and good looking. By more intelligient, I mean they will be able to program and understand massive equations that only idiot savants can. This will be the new average. Imagine all the world, full of geniuses, but without the negative attributes, like lacking social skills. If everyone is a scientist, as well as healthy and athletic, the world’s problems will end. And not only that, but there will be great new suprises, improved relationships, and scientific progress and tech beyond your wildest dreams.
All from just modifying a little bit of DNA.
I think you should probably shut up about obie, trix.
I think you should probably shut up about obie, trix.
This an open boards. Im not going to be silent about this. Orbie, get help.
I couldn’t lay down the hammer on you even if I wanted to. Just pointing out that when you don’t even know if someone is a he or a she, there is very little you can say about them without sounding like a little shit.
I found this thread after issuing a warning elsewhere. Trixie gets a 24 hour cooling off.
phoneutria:I think you should probably shut up about obie, trix.
This an open boards. Im not going to be silent about
this. Orbie, get help.
There is no cure against love, especially for philosophy. Some say it’s it’self an illness. For the cure, You’d sell not only Your body, but that of anyone close and dear to You. Thanks for the advice, sorry for Your ban, but it’s nly 24 hours. Tkake a pill, go to bed, and You’ll be laughing about it in the morning.
As always, orbie
When they change their DNA, they will become more intelligient, more healthy, athletic, kind, and good looking. By more intelligient, I mean they will be able to program and understand massive equations that only idiot savants can. This will be the new average. Imagine all the world, full of geniuses, but without the negative attributes, like lacking social skills. If everyone is a scientist, as well as healthy and athletic, the world’s problems will end. And not only that, but there will be great new suprises, improved relationships, and scientific progress and tech beyond your wildest dreams.
All from just modifying a little bit of DNA.
The changing of the human DNA has been being in the works for so long. … Solutions? More good than bad or more bad than good? I would say more …
I couldn’t lay down the hammer on you even if I wanted to. Just pointing out that when you don’t even know if someone is a he or a she, there is very little you can say about them without sounding like a little shit.
Why is the requirement of knowing someone’s gender needed to sound eloquent?
phoneutria:I couldn’t lay down the hammer on you even if I wanted to. Just pointing out that when you don’t even know if someone is a he or a she, there is very little you can say about them without sounding like a little shit.
Why is the requirement of knowing someone’s gender needed to sound eloquent?
It’s not at all – unrealistically speaking of course, it might be perhaps if the male or female needs that extra push knowing the other’s gender in order to impress a male or female with his/her eloquence, perhaps if he or she is looking for a mate. So it might simply be about looking for a mate.
On the other hand, is it possible that it might be needed from a person’s perspective? It still comes down to that extra push, I think but - a man may use certain things: qualities, manipulations, logic/reason, heart/pathos, et cetera to sound eloquent to another man or woman and a woman – the same thing.
That might not make any sense to you though Trixie girl. But in a way, it could make sense. People are always generalizing things in here like - men and women think and feel differently about things.
Men and women do think differently. You can always find a couple of transgendered lesbians here and there but that doesnt prove the bottom line.
To change the Dna I say we get a team of scientists together and make a DNA machine. We put the machine in several major cities and provide it as a free upgrade.
No, what I meant is that you don’t know the first thing about him.
I don’t know a whole lot about him either, but just from the fact that he is elderly, there were probably not even personal computers when he was at student age, let alone www.
Sure he could study philosophy from used books, and there is no reason for you to ever assume that he wouldn’t be able to figure that out by himself, and rather needed the money to pursue a degree in philosophy, not something unheard of, wanting to get a degree on a subject you love so you can find work in that field.
So who is it that needs to get help here? Sounds like you might need a little hand pulling your head out of your ass.
No, what I meant is that you don’t know the first thing about him.
I don’t know a whole lot about him either, but just from the fact that he is elderly, there were probably not even personal computers when he was at student age, let alone www.
Sure he could study philosophy from used books, and there is no reason for you to ever assume that he wouldn’t be able to figure that out by himself, and rather needed the money to pursue a degree in philosophy, not something unheard of, wanting to get a degree on a subject you love so you can find work in that field.
So who is it that needs to get help here? Sounds like you might need a little hand pulling your head out of your ass.
Ooh, the spider speaks. Mighty brave 'talkin to a Trixie like that.
No, what I meant is that you don’t know the first thing about him.
I don’t know a whole lot about him either, but just from the fact that he is elderly, there were probably not even personal computers when he was at student age, let alone www.
Sure he could study philosophy from used books, and there is no reason for you to ever assume that he wouldn’t be able to figure that out by himself, and rather needed the money to pursue a degree in philosophy, not something unheard of, wanting to get a degree on a subject you love so you can find work in that field.
So who is it that needs to get help here? Sounds like you might need a little hand pulling your head out of your ass.
Never heard about philosophy jobs. Philosophy is about being destitute and not fitting into society. Satyr is one of the best philosophers here, and he lives with his mom. Same with the ancient greek philosophers. They took prestige in their destitution, and social awkwardness. Philosophy isnt about getting paid as a philosophy job, or getting a degree in modern philosophy, never was.
Never heard about philosophy jobs. Philosophy is about being destitute and not fitting into society. Satyr is one of the best philosophers here, and he lives with his mom.
Shouldn’t a philosopher live alone?