Misembrance
1yr ago
any mandates are tyranny that must be defended against to the death
This seems like overly dramatic macho posturing. Obviously you are still alive and didn’t do anything of the sort.
Can you seriously not imagine a situation where mandates would be warranted? I don’t support the mandates for COVID, but being unwilling to even consider that there might be a point where the tradeoff scales tip is just an unreasonably ideological suicide pact. If there were a hypothetical disease much more deadly than COVID, surely you must be able to imagine such a thing
Misembrance
1yr ago
There was a time in the not-so-distant past that the country was effectively 100% Christian and weekly church attendance was the norm. Where did that lead us? Obviously God is not such a bulwark after all and doesn’t automatically eternally guarantee based tradwives until the end of time.
You have to then answer the question: Why will it turn out differently this time?
Misembrance
1yr ago
Has any politician of note?
Misembrance
1yr ago
Wikipedia is incredibly ambiguous regarding the consensus on the authenticity of the shrunken heads and lampshades.
A human skin lampshade was reported to have been displayed by Buchenwald concentration camp commandant Karl-Otto Koch and his wife Ilse Koch, along with multiple other human skin artifacts.[2] Despite myths to the contrary, there were no systematic efforts by the Nazis to make human skin lampshades.[3]
This seems to leave their authenticity an open question (systematic doesn’t mean it never happened). Google’s top results also seem very evasive and weasely. Do you have anything more solid or unambiguous regarding current mainstream consensus?
Misembrance
1yr ago
Are you seriously saying you would break someone’s nose because of comments about an event in 1850? Why are you so sensitive about it?
Misembrance
1yr ago
Conversely, what effect does the absence of adequately many representations of self have on our own self-image & identity? Without a reflection in the black mirror with which to see ourselves or be seen by others, do digital vampires even exist in a world where the Web has supplanted the real?
Sorry to be annoying, but could you just make your point plainly without pretentious metaphors? What do you mean by digital vampires? What is the black mirror? Do you just mean people without a social media presence? If that’s what you mean then why not say it? If that’s not what you mean, then perhaps my confusion is a predictable outcome of this writing style. Does this post say more than just a link to /r/instagramreality? It’s hard to tell if you don’t say it clearly
Misembrance
1yr ago
Ok, so if I accept your word definitions what can I do with it? What is the point? This is a bit like saying: Every memory can be classified as either happy, sad, both happy and sad or neither happy nor sad. Okay, so?
Misembrance
1yr ago
Why does their appreciation matter? This reads like: “If you don’t give your political opponents everything they want they might be unhappy”
Misembrance
1yr ago
Come on man, this is pure sophistry. The law is designed to reduce sentences for natives. Here we have a news story, showing that in practice it is used as it was designed. Yet we can’t conclude anything without a study? At some point asking for a study to back up the smallest inferences or conclusions is just a tactic to stall or shut down discussion
Misembrance
1yr ago
What is wrong with either of those things? Why would using familial DNA to solve theft be a bad thing? And what makes it a “fishing expedition” as opposed to just an “investigation”. Would canvassing an area for witnesses be considered a fishing expedition? If witnesses to a murder described the perpetrator as having a specific highly distinctive facial tattoo and then police tried to reference mugshots and ask around tattoo shops to find men with such a tattoo, would that be a fishing expedition? That just sounds like a typical investigative procedure to me, and surely a witness description of a specific tattoo is far more prone to false positives than familial DNA.
For everyone that had a problem with familial DNA, please tell me what kinds of investigative techniques you are okay with
Misembrance
1yr ago
Watched the doc, thanks for the recommendation. There were some mildly cringe parts (wanting to give Ilse Koch a hug lol), but whatever still interesting. Seems fairly clear the skin and heads were planted by the Allies, and this certainly does make me significantly revise my estimate of the likelihood of things. If the allies were provably engaged in conspiracies to fabricate evidence relating to the Holocaust in some cases, it has to make it more likely that other pieces of alleged evidence are merely fabrications as well
Misembrance
1yr ago
If we have to hold the line at firing the gay engineer to prevent getting to this point, well then I’d be fine with that. The slippery slope seems to have been very real, and so it’s just a question of where the slope became too steep to stop our slide.
Misembrance
1yr ago
This article puts a lot of weight on the phrase “legitimate grievance”, but that just sort of sidesteps the question of justification.
If you say my shirt is ugly, I may now have a “legitimate grievance” because you insulted my clothing, but this would hardly be sufficient justification if I chose to murder you in response. So the fact that it is a “legitimate grievance” is really very meaningless. Likewise, the question of “legitimate grievance” with respect to Russia seems similarly meaningless to me. All of these articles from Russia sympathizers are saying little more than “Yes but you insulted his shirt first!”
All of the articles like this have always left me with the same questions. And these are sincere questions, I know little about this conflict. Does the invasion of Ukraine actually do anything to prevent or rollback NATOs expansion? Does the invasion of Ukraine increase Russia’s security? Does the invasion of Ukraine benefit Russia in a way that outweighs the costs? Does it honestly seem like Russia is in a more secure position now than it was a year ago? If the answer is no, then how is any of this justification relevant?
Misembrance
1yr ago
Trump voting hard red state pipe fitters, electricians, etc) to flip shit because they didn't want to be forced to have more kids than they already had or get trapped into child support, and they voted accordingly. Another who'd gone from lib to DeSantis fan over COVID lockdowns and anti-woke stuff swung back to the Democrats over it. I can't emphasize this enough; people I know who use the N word as an adjective on a daily basis for household objects and even bird species + believe in Q-anon stuff were incensed and pulled the lever to give the pro-choice side a landslide victory when abortion rights came up to a vote.
This is hard to believe that they would react so strongly to largely symbolic bans coming from a party that has been saying this is precisely what they want to do for decades. It would be like suddenly losing it and flipping republican because Democrats decide to give blacks some effectively symbolic reparations checks for $100 or something.
Misembrance
1yr ago
One of the core tenents of the whole blue tribe memeplex is that behavior and morality exist completely independently of the other. It doesn't whether a man is a hard worker or a good father, what matters is what he thinks and what he feels
This is just absolutely ridiculous and demands justification
Misembrance
1yr ago
If the police are so popular across the political spectrum in the Netherlands is there actually much that needs reforming?
Misembrance
1yr ago
You and all your interlocutors seem to be talking past one another. You seem to be starting from the belief that NATO/globohomo is fundamentally intent on the genocide/replacement of white people. And because of this, nothing Russia does could be worse or less desirable for Ukraine than this.
I guess to get back to answering your initial question, I imagine most people supporting Ukraine are simply not starting with your set of beliefs regarding white genocide/globohomo. The vast gulf here in terms of assumptions makes discussion pretty pointless I think
Misembrance
1yr ago
Goes a bit further back than that as just an interesting sidenote. Lajos Kossuth toured the US and was hailed as perhaps the greatest living hero in the world in 1850 (with Russia also playing the villain here as well). We even named towns after the guy! We don’t have a Zelensky Iowa yet.
Misembrance
1yr ago
Why do you need to disarm people to have a war on drugs? The US would seem to prove this false
Misembrance
1yr ago
People I disagree with are ugly
Misembrance
1yr ago
Learning the earth was really 6000 years old would actually go a pretty long way towards convincing me Christianity is true. Maybe it doesn’t necessarily follow in a strict logical sense, but it would adjust my trust in the involved parties in such a radical way I would have to consider Christians the most trustworthy generally
Misembrance
1yr ago
-
Why be fearful? What exactly is the fear?
-
If you are fearful, how does invading Ukraine help? It only makes NATO stronger. Is Russia more secure now?
Misembrance
1yr ago
Saying that Alexandros didn’t recognize his own arguments as presented by Scott is a bit like saying “The glove didn’t fit when we asked OJ to try it on”
Misembrance
1yr ago
Every murderer is justified in their own mind. A school shooter believes he is exacting justified revenge on a world that is hateful to him. If we make the standard, “In his disillusioned view of the world it was logical” it would be hard to find anyone to blame! Presumably Hitler believed he was acting logically given the circumstances as well!!
You are misunderstanding Bayes. For your coin example, your prior belief the coin is fair is most likely not 50%. I’ve never encountered a coin I knew to be unfair in my life, so my prior belief that some random coin is fair is probably upwards of 90%. If I toss the coin a bunch and it comes up pretty much 50-50 perhaps I update my belief that the coin is fair to be 99.9% certainty.
As for whether or not you divorce your wife, well that’s not Bayes Theorem that’s just how you choose to apply the beliefs you have. I am highly certain my wife isn’t cheating on me, to be fair I can’t really say 100% certain, but I’m as close to 100% as I think anyone can reasonably be without stalking or imprisoning their spouse, so call it maybe 99%, which is good enough for me to not divorce her. If some event occurred that caused me to update my belief (she starts having weekly lunches with a male friend) then I would have to choose what to do with that updated belief.
And the choice is rarely so binary as divorce/not divorce. If my certainty in her fidelity fell to 90%, maybe I would just have a conversation with her about her new male friend. Maybe at 80% I’d ask her to please stop having lunch alone with this guy, and so on.
More options
Context Copy link