domain:drmanhattan16.substack.com
I legitimately did not know that converting to another religion means you don't qualify for the Law of Return. What I can't figure out (with five minutes of Googling) is whether that applies to atheist or agnostic Jews. Like, atheism isn't a religion you convert to, right? But it would be weird if Christian Jews were disqualified but atheist Jews weren't.
The tough-guy/hot chick tattoos of yesteryear are mostly finished in the wild. Some 40 year-olds who didn't get the memo still get them, but most of the tattoos I see nowadays are just crappy line doodles of flowers or mountains or whatever on the floppy, under-toned triceps of 20 year old girls. These don't communicate criminality or BPD or sluttiness like they did in the old days- they signal (intentionally or not) total conformity to Latest Thing. They look stupid, but I wouldn't even say they look ugly- they just look like she got pen on her arm, like an accident. Tattoos as threat- or sexual availability-signals I could at least understand, but I don't understand these new ones at all.
I think this is too harsh, MBTI has value if you understand its limitations. For example managers can use it as a shortcut to understand management styles until you get to know your staff on an individual level.
In a healthcare context you can use it to understand a little bit about what interventions, therapy, explanations and so on will work for a patient until you get to know them better.
Most patients won't know that they prefer a logical style of consenting over an emotional one, but if they tell you they are an INTJ you can be pretty sure, etc.
I don't claim it's a very special insight, but I think the romanticism of one side has been made into a meme (on KYM no less) and it was worth looking at the less explored side of it as well.
The leftist mockery of rightism is never about how it's unrealistic, only that it's evil.
Hey, lots of veterans are meatheads who make awful decisions, too. Who was doing the raping during the Rape of Nanking? Yes, that's a bad example in the context of America.
Not all veterans, of course, but men in the service are commonly exactly the stereotype that I'm struck by when I notice multiple visible tattoos, coarse rough-and-tumble assholes who one-up each other, drink, and do stupid things. My favorite non-fiction book is probably Quartered Safe Out Here, which certainly did not dispel my false stereotype. I actually didn't recall that Pete Hegseth is a veteran, if it helps.
I see no contradiction.
It's not meant to be a contradiction, it's meant to underscore that one's assessment of a system has to take into account what one believes that one's role in that system would be.
That is -- we agree that this is the same system. But the people daydreaming about destroying capitalism and replacing it with (whatever) are imagining a small slice of it. They imagine the commune but not the forced labor. They imagine the social order but don't imagine that they would ever see the sharp end of the stick.
Who's Howard?
Jeremy Howard runs fast.ai.
You got 15k xp in 4 months? Pretty sweet, I skipped literally everything in college, so getting a decent XP is slightly harder for me. I learnt nothing beyond the 9th grade, even though I got an undergrad degree 2 years ago. I was doing 180 XP daily at my peak but have always had consistency issues. I wish I were more consistent.
Trace knows a lot of cool, helpful people in the learning sphere, a lot of them are rationalist adjacent.
Matthew 7:2 isn't so bad, on its own, but 7:1 literally starts with "judge not". And Matthew 7:3 suggests the judge has problems of his own he ought to be considering before judging anyone else.
The same sentiment is in John 8:7, "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her". Only the perfect (i.e. God) get to judge, everyone else can suck it.
I agree but I also endorse /u/maiqthetrue below that there is some kind of equivocation here.
There is also something else here -- the leftist version doesn't always actually explain quotidian things like how the food is grown when no one choses to be a farmer than wakes up at 5AM and works for 12H a day.
The guy working the counter at Mcd is not the modal poor person or recipient of benefits. The modal person is on welfare, (fraudulent) disability or similar who does not work at all and is not looking for work.
We don't need them, unless "we" = left wing politicians who harvest their votes or perhaps educated leftists gaining money/status from fake jobs servicing them.
The rest of us would be better off without them.
I do not see rational and irrational sentiments to be disconnected
What do you mean? Do you disagree that humans have instinctively strong desires, which spring from their evolved biology? Do you disagree that human instinct is often unaligned with human reason? Is sugar not more desirable to you than bitter herbs? Do you not believe that “beauty” is inherently more pleasing than “non-beauty”? All of this is due to our evolved biology. Reason can say that it’s best not to smoke cigarettes, but this seldom influences the decision of a habitual smoker, because their biology finds it pleasant and they want to keep the habit in spite of reason. And you don’t live in a country where everyone is skinny, right? Or a world where teenagers stop playing video games late into the evening because they care about their 15-year plan and the effects of poor sleep.
culture's mystical traditions
My culture’s mysticism rigidly distinguishes between the Spiritual Person, which is spirit and intellect and prosocial emotions, and the Flesh, which is the instinctual cravings of the animal part of man. However, I don’t necessarily think this is the optimal way to construe things.
As a last question: when boys are choosing a book or movie, do they choose something about healthy strong man taking charge, or do they choose something about a young woman? Why do you think this is, if you can’t fall back to “it is in their instincts”?
Sure. I think the question there is about whether the vision for where the individual tradcon fits into their hypothetical future lines up with reality.
Unless someone can gamify it to some extent, lay out an extremely clear path for progression, with periodic rewards and a well-defined end-goal, and some mechanism for accountability, then I'm just less likely to commit to it fully, since I'd have to use discipline to establish a habit and overcome the initial unpleasantness. But so many side activities seem pretty pointless to engage with if they aren't going to drastically increase your status or wealth, even if the skill itself is handy on its own terms.
I think gamification is the exactly opposite of what you need. I cycled through a bunch of frankly masturbatory hobbies before I settled on woodworking. I tried to learn guitar, I tried mountain biking, I did martial arts for a long time, I've tried to make video games off and on for my entire adult life, did a smattering of electronics repair. All of them, to various degrees, felt like pissing in the ocean. I think I enjoyed the martial arts and mountain biking the most, but at a certain point going through the motions felt pointless. Especially with martial arts, once I no longer had anything to prove to myself that I could do it, I just wasn't feeling it anymore. I sunk costed through many more years of just showing up, but my drive to put in the extra work evaporated. A lot of what compelled me to put time into hobbies I really wasn't getting anything out of was the addictiveness of the gamification in the learning method.
But woodworking, at least for now, is fantastic. I make beautiful things that go into my home that are exactly what I want, and I don't care one teeny tiny bit how they stack up to what anyone else has done. It's not gamified, it's not competitive, but it's marginally creative and meets specific needs. Plus it's nice having hardwood furniture in my house instead of flat packed sawdust and glue. Mastering a smattering of baking recipes has been similar. I wanted great scones, I didn't like any of the bakeries around me, I figured out a recipe that produces the scones I want and now my family gets to enjoy them.
Human motivation is funny, and in several ways, I suspect gamification has spoiled our brains to expect more rewards for fake task than they deserve. I've found making real things you actually want and need has been a great detox, and doesn't necessarily carry with it the sort of "I'm too tapped out from work to do this" vibe that other more masturbatory and pointless hobbies might. But that might just be me.
I mean, the left and the right are huge spaces. I think some of the right wants to greatly change society, especially along gender lines. Some doesn't and just wants a nicer economy, less crime and fair college admissions.
This is just not true, communists want to participate in politics and this is a key component of their ideology. They don't want any rulers. And they want everyone down to small groups to rule themselves democratically.
The dictatorship of the proletariat is a transitional artifice to allow the state to wither away, if you remember. There is no "correct ruler". There is only the required politicization of the masses to the death until history finally synthesizes the perfect society.
I won't relitigate here the "but what if you get a bad king?" question since that's a matter over which large amounts of ink have been spilled and it is irrelevant to this discussion of the teleology of either ideology.
Your example link goes to the "nice hat" reddit post. This has happened to me. You copy paste a reddit image link and somehow it points to "nice hat".
People centuries ago drank and said dirty jokes. They weren't typically flogged for such popular and common behavior. For example the puritans drank a lot by modern standards. Drunkenness was not much respected.
The would-be commune dweller is funny because leading discussion groups and making clothes out of scraps is no more plausible as a career after the revolution than it is before. If it's not profitable to do under a capitalist system them it's not practical to do under a communist system.
Sadly this is not true. The profitability of making clothes out of scraps depends the opportunity cost of that labor to do something else useful. If Communism destroys all other productive activity, it will render that profitable. Of course, the other way to say that is "your labor will be so worthless that mending socks will be net positive".
Being a warlord is a real job, it's just that you chose for some reason to compare a regular person making clothes out of scraps with a highly-exclusive job reserved for social elites.
I think the mockery of the leftists is that "person that doesn't have to do hard labor but can futz about in the garden, sew embroidery and teach the children for an hour in the afternoon" is an aristocratic/elite position.
"Under an authoritarian system I would be one of the dictator's goons enforcing his will on the people and exploiting his power to enrich myself," may not be a very moral stance, but no one can say that it's not a tried-and-true strategy for getting ahead.
That can't work for everyone. And there is quite a bit of intra-goon competition there too. It's a very slippery post.
For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
Sounds to me like an endorsement of judging, so long as you realize you will be held to the same standards.
This topic came up because I was ranting against Pete Hegseth. The party of family values puts forward this womanizing gruff tattooed washed up Fox News guy.
...You left out the Veteran part. that seems like a notable factor to exclude.
Everyone always leaves out verse 5:
Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.
This is a disgusting form of submissive behavior.
Surely that all depends on your perspective, doesn't it!
I would never get one myself, ever. But I don't judge other people for getting them. The correlation with criminality seems rather low given how popular they are these days.
Funny enough, this was my second impulse after I tested its capabilities.
I have an account with the list/organization app "Remember the Milk," and it has a web interface, it is very handy.
I should be able to get GPT Agent to enter list items, and sublist items, and relevant notes, as part of relatively simple prompts.
"Book me a haircut this Sunday" should lead to reserving the appointment at my preferred barbershop, adding the haircut to my to-do list with the start time set for the appointment time, and adding a reminder enough time in advance for me to drive over, and setting aside the approximate amount of time it should take to get the hair cut.
And more generalized stuff, as you say. "Add a reminder to cook [specialized dish] tomorrow evening, find a highly rated recipe, and make a list of all relevant ingredients, and prepare a pickup order for those groceries from the nearest Aldi." Then I can just remove the items I already have, submit and pick up the order.
And if I can get this thing to take over the more arduous steps of planning events with friends, I'd be ecstatic.
If Full Self-driving cars are actually solved now, we're getting very close to a point where I can do this entire operation without once seeing or interacting with a real person. Terrifying, but also very appealing.
Oh, and if ChatGPT adds on digital avatars like Grok (plz no), we can ask our digital waifus to do this stuff for us. Very Trad.
FU
TU
RE
IS
HE
RE
Humans don’t stumble across abstract philosophy in the natural environment.
[...]
So there’s a very real, and useful, distinction between “humans do this because intellect/reason assures them of a delayed benefit”, and “humans do this because they feel a strong primal urge to do it”.
I disagree with both statements. I do not see rational and irrational sentiments to be disconnected as you do. I recommend engaging deeply with your culture's mystical traditions if you wish to dispel this misconception.
“old as history” means “as old as civilization”
The anthropology of prehistory is, as you know, heavily contested. But I'm disinclined to believe that tribal modes of organization could not have taken both democratic, oligarchic and monarchic forms given that we have examples of all such in primitive tribes in recorded history. Human nature and the incentives generated by social groups, which we know now to always have been a feature of human existence, make all three arrangements possible given certain material conditions.
What you seem to be describing as not "biological" is merely technology.
I've watched a lot of anime before, most of it isn't this bad tbh. I'm surprised this one is so popular def concerning to me. Also the fact that there's a stay at home dad with a girlboss mom gives me the ick.
But hey I'm still watching it, so...
The fact that this is extremely close to
And I think both will end in the same exploitative place and the rediscovery about why socialist revolutions had to be enforced violently.
More options
Context Copy link