So I finally took a look at my W-2 in preparation for finally doing my taxes.
It's always stunning to look at how much you made over the past year, even after taxes, and then realize how little of that was money you could spend on toys or other luxuries.
Although I guess in a way since I don't live in the ghetto or have to walk to work, I could consider my apartment and car luxuries of a sort.
What I'm getting at is it never feels like I made that much money.
Of course, his accessibility is wonderful to me. I'm a fan of his conception of free will, and what he has to say about determinism.
You are a fan of compatiblism?!?!?!?
Not really. Dennett redefines free will to something that is compatible, it's incredibly interesting, actually! It has to deal more with the ability to predict future outcomes and a concept of "evitability".
Whenever I look up homemade pornography a part of me eagerly hopes for bronzed adonises making aesthetically pleasing love to their gorgeous girlfriends.
Instead it's a dude in a For the Horde t-shirt rolled up over his stomach pounding his bored looking girlfriend with burn scars.
you're going to the wrong sites
I imagine that there are a whole class of sites designed to seem "amateur" but mostly done by professionals.
I'd imagine that the first example is probably the more genuine stuff, unfortunately.
Whenever I look up homemade pornography a part of me eagerly hopes for bronzed adonises making aesthetically pleasing love to their gorgeous girlfriends.
Instead it's a dude in a For the Horde t-shirt rolled up over his stomach pounding his bored looking girlfriend with burn scars.
you're going to the wrong sites
I imagine that there are a whole class of sites designed to seem "amateur" but mostly done by professionals.
I'd imagine that the first example is probably the more genuine stuff, unfortunately.
Yes, there is actual amateur stuff and then there's pro amateur which is considered amateur anyway but it's professional and usually awful.
Is there a word for the belief in randomness with no free will?
Crazy?
I call it the philosophy of Two Face.
Couscous on
0
Options
Podlyyou unzipped me! it's all coming back! i don't like it!Registered Userregular
edited April 2010
I remember consciousness explained to be book-burning bad, but I breezed through that. His dismissal of qualia was really terrible. It would be like if I wanted to argue for a Heideggerian ontological/ontical divide and said "the I isn't made out of matter, so clearly we must be non-physical ontological beings!"
To say "I find this intersection of [class] and [behavior] repulsive, but not [behavior] or [class] in isolation" doesn't really make a whole lot of sense.
This is tantamount to asserting that it's impossible to tolerate something without wishing to experience or partake in it.
I don't see how your objection follows from my statement.
I think my desire for a trim quote tree obfuscated my point. I was responding more to everything you have said so far - which I think does lead to that. I think if a person - Will, or whomever - doesn't enjoy witnessing or partaking in a certain act, it does not follow that he is reinforcing his dominance over a subjugated class. Equating distaste with oppression strikes me as incredibly convenient.
As for the sentence I quoted, though, that is problematic in its own way! You seem to be saying that people either enjoy behaviors or they don't, and their enjoyment is predicated on no other preconditions. "I like steak" doesn't mean "I like steak when I'm full" or "I like steak when the dude serving it has flies buzzing around him."
I remember consciousness explained to be book-burning bad, but I breezed through that. His dismissal of qualia was really terrible. It would be like if I wanted to argue for a Heideggerian ontological/ontical divide and said "the I isn't made out of matter, so clearly we must be non-physical ontological beings!"
It's terrible, terrible philosophy.
In his defense, if one dismisses qualia and most faculties of consciousness it becomes much easier to explain consciousness.
_J_ on
0
Options
Irond WillWARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!!Cambridge. MAModeratormod
i find fat and/ or hairy people naked kind of gross
though i don't have a problem with them clothed
I think that most Americans' attitudes towards nudity in particular are shaped by media depictions of nudity; in other words our expectations of what a nude human should look like are based largely around Hollywood and porn.
So a statement like "I find fat or hairy people kind of gross" is an implicit admission that you're really not comfortable with nudity when it involves actual humans; you're only comfortable with it when it involves media fictions, or with the particular humans who happen to fulfill those fictions.
I'm not really a consumer of pornography. My experience with human nudity has been much more in-the-flesh than on-the-screen or in-the-magazine.
I mean culture shapes our attitudes to some degree of course, but would you say that you don't have personal preferences? If you prefer one person's appearance over another's, then would you say that this is preference, or that its bigotry?
I've mentioned before that I prefer women with smaller boobs to big-boobed girls. Is this an acceptable preference by your rubric, since it's probably a minority preference, or is it just more bigotry, only of a different flavor?
If i find great big floppy boobs a little revolting, is that now bigotry? Ungroomed armpits and body hair? Body odor and grease? I guess you have given leave for me to not be attracted to these things, but might i beg your permission to actually find them a little revolting?
I mean it feels like you and a few others are kind of championing the principle of being undiscerning.
i mean at the end of the day, feral, i don't think we have a great deal of control over what we find aesthetically or sexually attractive
I'm not talking about attraction, I'm talking about repulsion. Those aren't even two sides of a linear spectrum; they're two separate axes entirely. You can be aroused, or repulsed, or neither, or both by a given stimulus.
my experiences have not been that these things are orthogonal. in fact, i thought that the coincidence of "revulsion" and "arousal" was considered some sort of sexual pathology.
I remember consciousness explained to be book-burning bad, but I breezed through that. His dismissal of qualia was really terrible. It would be like if I wanted to argue for a Heideggerian ontological/ontical divide and said "the I isn't made out of matter, so clearly we must be non-physical ontological beings!"
It's terrible, terrible philosophy.
I've never read Consciousness Explained. You should pick up Freedom Evolves.
Winky on
0
Options
Podlyyou unzipped me! it's all coming back! i don't like it!Registered Userregular
Whenever I look up homemade pornography a part of me eagerly hopes for bronzed adonises making aesthetically pleasing love to their gorgeous girlfriends.
Instead it's a dude in a For the Horde t-shirt rolled up over his stomach pounding his bored looking girlfriend with burn scars.
they are just as beautiful as all other humans cass how dare you!
Irond Will on
0
Options
Podlyyou unzipped me! it's all coming back! i don't like it!Registered Userregular
I remember consciousness explained to be book-burning bad, but I breezed through that. His dismissal of qualia was really terrible. It would be like if I wanted to argue for a Heideggerian ontological/ontical divide and said "the I isn't made out of matter, so clearly we must be non-physical ontological beings!"
It's terrible, terrible philosophy.
I've never read Consciousness Explained. You should pick up Freedom Evolves.
Actually, I've read Elbow Room, which is his actual philosophical arguments for his free will stance.
Is killing myself really as easy as swallowing a whole bottle of aspirin?
Does it hurt?
I don't think it's impossible to die from that. But it's highly unlikely.
It is likely to cause some pretty nasty shit to happen though.
It's a slim chance. Around ~3% or so. Mostly it just makes you wish you died and in theory the liver damage will kill you eventually. It's an amazingly stupid way to go. Is this wish brought up by an urge to remove yourself from the world, or just idle speculation?
Thomamelas on
0
Options
Irond WillWARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!!Cambridge. MAModeratormod
Posts
It's always stunning to look at how much you made over the past year, even after taxes, and then realize how little of that was money you could spend on toys or other luxuries.
Although I guess in a way since I don't live in the ghetto or have to walk to work, I could consider my apartment and car luxuries of a sort.
What I'm getting at is it never feels like I made that much money.
Not really. Dennett redefines free will to something that is compatible, it's incredibly interesting, actually! It has to deal more with the ability to predict future outcomes and a concept of "evitability".
I imagine that there are a whole class of sites designed to seem "amateur" but mostly done by professionals.
I'd imagine that the first example is probably the more genuine stuff, unfortunately.
And yet you continue to post the best videos! Fucking uncanny!
Well I assume that you are a living, breathing person with a history who has a reason to not swallow the whole bottle of aspirin.
I'd like to know what things interest you, since philosophy is demonstrably not one of them.
Yes, there is actual amateur stuff and then there's pro amateur which is considered amateur anyway but it's professional and usually awful.
Does it hurt?
And then sweep kick.
What did I tell you about snooping around my browser history!
Crazy?
IT works if a friend does not find you and get your stomach pumped shortly after consumption.
I call it the philosophy of Two Face.
It's terrible, terrible philosophy.
I think my desire for a trim quote tree obfuscated my point. I was responding more to everything you have said so far - which I think does lead to that. I think if a person - Will, or whomever - doesn't enjoy witnessing or partaking in a certain act, it does not follow that he is reinforcing his dominance over a subjugated class. Equating distaste with oppression strikes me as incredibly convenient.
As for the sentence I quoted, though, that is problematic in its own way! You seem to be saying that people either enjoy behaviors or they don't, and their enjoyment is predicated on no other preconditions. "I like steak" doesn't mean "I like steak when I'm full" or "I like steak when the dude serving it has flies buzzing around him."
I don't think it's impossible to die from that. But it's highly unlikely.
It is likely to cause some pretty nasty shit to happen though.
Why, exactly, would you like to know?
I mean, there are a whole host of things that interest me, but why exactly should I enumerate them for you?
In his defense, if one dismisses qualia and most faculties of consciousness it becomes much easier to explain consciousness.
I'm not really a consumer of pornography. My experience with human nudity has been much more in-the-flesh than on-the-screen or in-the-magazine.
I mean culture shapes our attitudes to some degree of course, but would you say that you don't have personal preferences? If you prefer one person's appearance over another's, then would you say that this is preference, or that its bigotry?
I've mentioned before that I prefer women with smaller boobs to big-boobed girls. Is this an acceptable preference by your rubric, since it's probably a minority preference, or is it just more bigotry, only of a different flavor?
If i find great big floppy boobs a little revolting, is that now bigotry? Ungroomed armpits and body hair? Body odor and grease? I guess you have given leave for me to not be attracted to these things, but might i beg your permission to actually find them a little revolting?
I mean it feels like you and a few others are kind of championing the principle of being undiscerning.
my experiences have not been that these things are orthogonal. in fact, i thought that the coincidence of "revulsion" and "arousal" was considered some sort of sexual pathology.
It's like a suicide test! If you really have nothing to live for, it'll work!
Everyone loves having a lifetime of horrible digestive problems.
I've never read Consciousness Explained. You should pick up Freedom Evolves.
I'm sorry.
I thought I was on a social message board.
Most people vomit when they try with aspirin.
Maybe try chilling out?
they are just as beautiful as all other humans cass how dare you!
Actually, I've read Elbow Room, which is his actual philosophical arguments for his free will stance.
It was very, very, very poor philosophy.
I assume sleeping pills would be a nice way to go. Sleep is pretty great.
It's a slim chance. Around ~3% or so. Mostly it just makes you wish you died and in theory the liver damage will kill you eventually. It's an amazingly stupid way to go. Is this wish brought up by an urge to remove yourself from the world, or just idle speculation?
not really and yes incredibly
I didn't get drunk the other night because just as I was starting to get buzzed I was all afraid of puking
the same sort of thing happened the last time I drank