@Primaprimaprima's banner p

Primaprimaprima

...something all admit only "TRUMP", and the Trump Administration, can do.

3 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 05 01:29:15 UTC

"...Perhaps laughter will then have formed an alliance with wisdom; perhaps only 'gay science' will remain."


				

User ID: 342

Primaprimaprima

...something all admit only "TRUMP", and the Trump Administration, can do.

3 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 05 01:29:15 UTC

					

"...Perhaps laughter will then have formed an alliance with wisdom; perhaps only 'gay science' will remain."


					

User ID: 342

No it’s… not?

There’s pretty strong agreement on that from all sides of the political spectrum.

we don't see the appeal in a dangerous partner

It's actually not a fantasy structure that's exclusive to women! It's just more common in women because, obviously, men are the more violent and aggressive ones.

Do you know how many audio files there are for guys with titles like "serial killer yandere ties you up in her basement because she wants to be with you forever ASMR"? A lot more than you might expect!

but if the tariffs are painless and everyone is still buying cheap shit from China, aren't we losing???

Pretty much, yeah.

Of course it was never reasonable to think that "tariffs" meant "stop all trade with China". It couldn't have meant that, because that's just not how things get done in the neoliberal world order. I'm not an economist and I haven't followed the technical details of this story closely, but I do know that there's no big red switch labeled "TARIFFS" that they just flip on and off. You look at the actual details of the agreements and it's always something like, "an O(n*log(n)) prorated surcharge will be applied to soybeans from these three farms just outside of Shenzhen every fifth Tuesday when Venus is in retrograde", rather than "fuck China we got our own soybeans now". The devil's in the details.

So either Trump's powerless to implement his vision of reshaping global trade, or he doesn't actually want to, or this IS the agenda as he envisioned it and this is the extent of the impact. But either way it doesn't look like much of anything is going to change.

Mostly trolls whose names I've forgotten. That guy who keeps making alt accounts here to post WN articles and then delete them is kinda like that.

Apparently darwin was kinda like that, although I never interacted with darwin personally.

Watch Death Note. I've never found a human who didn't like Death Note.

Uchikoshi overall wrote less of it than Kodaka did, but he had a block of routes in the back half of the game where he had free rein to do his own thing. So if you’re willing to tolerate the Kodaka parts to get to the Uchikoshi parts then I’d say it’s still worth it.

Final Fantasy 9

OP’s a woman

Yes but this is a topic that comes up with some frequency and there are certain male posters who have strong opinions on it as well.

they’re more upset that the women aren’t being promiscuous with them

Yes but the point is that they care about it at all, regardless of their motivations. (The motivations are at least somewhat complex and multilayered. Yes at the end of the day it’s really about “all the women should belong to me” but I think there’s at least some genuine pro-social concern mixed in as well.)

Well, the problem is that some people have the exact opposite intuition! They can’t see why qualia should pose a problem for physicalism at all. Thus the debate carries on interminably.

How do I survive in a world where the heuristics people hold holy on both sides end up being wrong so often?

Von Neumann said "you don't understand things in math, you just get used to them". It's similar in philosophy. You never actually solve philosophical problems, but you can outgrow them.

Most of the questions here are ones you'll eventually outgrow, assuming your development is not prematurely arrested.


Regarding the "Why Modern Art is so awful" essay: Luke’s explanation of “it’s a reaction to photography” is too simplistic. Any theory of "modern art" (bit of a vague term but we'll roll with it) has to account for the fact that there are people who really do like this stuff. Genuinely. It's not (always) a scam.

Nancy McWilliams described modern art as essentially being "by schizos, for schizos":

Sass (1992) has compellingly described how schizoid conditions are emblematic of modernity. The alienation of contemporary people from a communal sensibility, reflected in the deconstructive perspectives of 20th-century art, literature, anthropology, philosophy, and criticism, has eerie similarities to schizoid and schizophrenic experience. Sass notes in particular the attitudes of alienation, hyperreflexivity (elaborate self-consciousness), detachment, and rationality gone virtually mad that characterize modern and postmodern modes of thought and art, contrasting them with "the world of the natural attitude, the world of practical activity, shared communal meanings, and real physical presences" (p. 354). His exposition also calls effectively into question numerous facile and oversimplified accounts of schizophrenia and the schizoid experience.

If modern art is primarily produced and enjoyed by people who naturally feel at home in these modes of thought and experience, whereas the majority of the human population does not recognize themselves in this experience, then that could help explain some of the disconnect.

I once posted Klee's Angelus Novus here on TheMotte as an example of a first-rate painting, and was met with disapproval and incredulity. But you'll have to take my word for it that I really do find it to be quite lovely!

I thought Elfen Lied was great… when I was in high school. Now, it’d probably go in the “guilty pleasure” box at best.

I can’t imagine recommending it to someone who’s just getting into anime, unless I already knew they were into that sort of thing.

What do these ratings mean, what is the scale?

You and most other posters on this thread seem to think that women are only interested in dangerous men being dangerous to other people and are obviously in denial about the possibility that dangerous men are dangerous to them.

Oh no, I don't think that at all! In fact I thought about including a line about that in my post - "she could simply have a masochistic streak, she could enjoy the palpable sense of danger" - but I decided not to, because I find that comments are generally more persuasive and attention-grabbing when you only include one bizarre claim instead of multiple.

I do think the "I'm a highly distinguished person to him" aspect of it is probably stronger in the majority of cases than the "I like being in danger myself" aspect, simply because even the most masochistic and self-destructive people still show an aversion to acute physical danger. Although, funny enough I just linked someone downthread to Freud's essay on the death instinct, where he explores how a primordial instinct for self-destruction could coexist alongside an apparently overriding concern for self-preservation. That could certainly be relevant in cases like this.

Do you think there's no alien life anywhere, or do you just believe that it's implausible that it's a) intelligent and b) has the means and desire to get here?

I obviously don't know my own level of testosterone or how that compares to other men.

A shy, quiet, intellectually-inclined friend of mine got his T levels checked and he was dead center average (by male standards).

Obviously there's something important going on with sex hormones and how they affect cognitive and personality traits, but it's not as simple as "number go up = big manly man, number go down = beta nerd".

9 and 10 are hyper GOAT status for me, some of the best games ever made across any genre.

7’s alright, but even back when I played it for the first time as a kid I thought it was overrated.

I enjoyed 8 quite a bit more than you did, but that was probably just due to the spectacle of how much of a fever dream it was, rather than it being a “good game” in the traditional sense.

but then never got around to Umineko, which at that time seemed to me like just more of the same, but as a "normal" murder mystery.

Yeah it's kinda the opposite. Higurashi is amazing too but ultimately it's "just" a good murder mystery story. Umineko is capital-A Art.

You really do have to play the video game version. If it's been ported to phones that's fine too. I've never watched the anime or read the manga but I've been told the anime is awful. Apparently the manga is pretty good, but no matter how good it is, the video game version does some things that really work best in a digital medium. Plus it just has an amazing soundtrack, it's an integral part of the experience.

Sex (or, to generalize and be more precise, "access to a woman's body" - this includes sexual contact in general and childbearing in particular) is important to men. To the point that it's a necessary component of romantic relationships. Not the only component, but a necessary one. I know this from my own experience of being a man, from my experience of having male friends, from the fact that dating advice (TRP, PUA, etc) and dating apps are a multi-million dollar industry with a mostly male clientele, and just in general, from everything that's ever happened to me in my life. Sex is what men are seeking.

Female bodies are more valuable than male bodies. Women are acutely aware of how in-demand their bodies are. She knows that merely being granted access to your body is not adequate compensation for her granting you access to her body. So she typically wants something else from you as well. Thus the very generalized heading of "goods and services". (To be clear, relatively abstract things like "personality" and "companionship" could also be considered "goods and services").

This does not cover every possible configuration of human interactions. I was careful to qualify that this is only a typical and average type of exchange.

[comic sans]UAP DISCLOSURE UPDATES[/comic sans]

The mood in the UFO community has been rather dour lately due to a string of disappointments and setbacks, but Rep. Eric Burlison of Missouri dropped some promising indications this week that Congress has not forgotten about the topic and full disclosure may very well still be in the works:

"We're pursuing a hearing date. We've got a list of people that we're looking at. We're actually looking at potentially doing two. One with some people that are direct whistleblowers, who have had direct, and when I say direct, they had eyes directly on or have personally encountered UAP. In their formal operations."

"Not somebody out and about like Joe Blow out there that saw something. There's thousands and thousands of people like that. We're talking about people that worked for the Pentagon, worked in a government program, where they worked in and around this technology. Whether it was through crash retrieval, or through reverse engineering, that's what we're pursuing right now."

"The next hearing after that, once we're able to get information, we're looking at doing some interrogatories, which is where you take some of the things that have been said in these briefings, in these open hearings under oath. And then we send a formal letter as a committee, asking for answers from, whether it's Tulsi Gabbard, or whomever it is that we need to be asking these questions of. And then which would send up the potential second hearing, which would hopefully be able to clear people like Tulsi Gabbard to come forward."

"And I've been told she's very... friendly when it comes to this topic. That she wants disclosure. She wants to help bring about disclosure on this topic."

I don't just dislike horror, I don't see the point. It's either jumpscares or unending tension. It boggles my mind why anyone would enjoy this genre.

I've been planning on eventually writing an effortpost here about the horror genre and some of its problems. So I'm glad to see there may be some interest in that here.

The TL;DR is that the "modern horror film" as such has a lot of issues, as you correctly point out, but I think that works that have horror elements are quite fascinating (David Lynch films are a good example).

What's your favorite Nietzsche book?

(If you say Zarathustra or WtP you're a poser.)

It just seems as though it would be weird to be a self-aware, reasoning person who's nonetheless in the grip of that kind of perceptual distortion.

It's a good question!

All humans are familiar with the experience of impulse control, and the failure thereof. You should start that project tonight, but you don't. You shouldn't eat that donut because you're on a diet, but you do. You know that rationally you should be able to control your impulse, and it would be better for you if you did, but that often doesn't help much in the moment. These are universal experiences. The only difference with men is that they experience particularly strong sexual impulses, of a variety which many women find foreign. Like many impulses, they're fundamentally immune to examination by reason (knowing that the donut is unhealthy for you doesn't stop it from tasting good).

Impulse control follows a bell curve. Most men are able to rein in their sexual impulses and live perfectly normal lives in accordance with social expectations. The ones who are cursed with a sufficiently deleterious combination of high impulse intensity / poor impulse control are the ones who become criminals.

The fundamental point you're gesturing at is correct: men are insane! Their insanity has been the engine of so much death and destruction throughout history. But it's also been the engine of so much beauty and goodness. Things in life have a habit of working out like that.

I found a much simpler way of explaining it.

Say you're in a large crowd of strangers, you don't know anybody. You scan the crowd and every individual person looks largely the same to you, they just melt into a sea of anonymity. But then you notice your best friend somewhere in the crowd; suddenly this person "lights up" in a way that none of the others did, to you this person looks quite different, even though to anyone else they would look like just another stranger. Importantly, this isn't a conceptual/discursive thing: you don't have to consciously think to yourself "oh there's my friend, we had plans to meet up today, I should go talk to them now". It's baked into the immediate visual perception itself that they just "glow" in a way that the strangers don't, pre-discursively, even though from an "objective" point of view there's nothing really to distinguish the raw visual image of your friend from the raw visual image of any other person.

People who are higher in "meaningfulness of experience" have these experiences more often and from a wider range of stimuli, people who are lower in meaningfulness have them less often.

We can hypothesize that the mechanism of action in full blown schizophrenia is that this meaningfulness becomes so excessive that the person has to adopt delusional beliefs just so they can build a coherent internal model of their own sensory experience (e.g. that signpost on the side of the road looks so salient because it must be a coded message just for me that was planted there by the CIA).

I've also noted one instance of an AAGP in the wild (a woman who wanted to be a man who wanted to be a woman)

I will admit that the inverse of this has crossed my mind on more than one occasion.