Peter-Andre

Member
  • Content count

    185
  • Joined

  • Last visited

2 Followers

About Peter-Andre

  • Rank
    - - -

Personal Information

  • Location
    Norway
  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

894 profile views
  1. @Leo Gura I'm a bit confused here. If this is healthy blue, how do I differentiate that from unhealthy blue? In particular, how can being anti-Covid measures be seen as healthy, even by blue standards? Wouldn't healthy blue be supportive of such measures for the collective good? As an anecdotal example, my grandmother (from Norway btw) is very pro-lockdowns or similar restrictions, and as I understand it, positive towards the vaccine as well, but she is nonetheless very conservative. Definitely a good example of healthy blue, maybe even the best example of healthy blue I know. Are we dealing with a content-structure difference here, where they might have toxic opinions, but are nonetheless willing to discuss them and possibly even change their minds in face of new evidence?
  2. @Eren Eeager Not to mention the fact that even if we understood the mind perfectly, it would still be incredibly difficult to program it to learn to play guitar. That is also an extremely complex skill which requires a lot of training. Maybe this will be possible someday, but I don't see it happening any time soon. Creative jobs will probably be the last to be fully automated (if ever).
  3. @Leo Gura Can I just ask a question for clarification? Even though I've always agreed with you that the left is generally more conscious than the right, would you say that an individual right-winger can still be more conscious than an individual on the left? And if so, how common is this? What other factors would we have to look at to determine their level of consciousness? I guess what I'm really asking here is, how direct is the relationship between someone's level of consciousness and their political leaning?
  4. @Danioover9000 I think he probably meant that it was funny how some people had so strong negative reactions to CRT without even knowing what it is.
  5. @StarfoxEpiphany Alright, now I have to ask: Are you just trolling right now?
  6. @StarfoxEpiphany It seems to me like you don't want to really listen to and understand what the other side is trying to say. There are good reasons for why drug laws in the US have historically been, and continue, to perpetuate racism and disproportionately attack people of color, but you don't seem to be willing to even entertain that idea. You seem to be doing this with all the people in this thread who you disagree with. Instead of trying to engage with people in good faith, you look for cheap gotchas and twist their words around to bastardize their arguments to a point where it doesn't seem like you have the slightest interest in exploring other people's points of view on this topic.
  7. @StarfoxEpiphany Do you know why some people consider the history of American marijuana and drug laws to be racist? This is not a rhetorical question btw.
  8. I don't think it's practically doable right now, but I would love something like that in the future.
  9. I would encourage everyone here to take a look at the video Epikur posted above. It goes into quite a lot of depth on this issue and provides a nuanced and well information coverage of this subject.
  10. @ArcticGong Yes, you're right. It could certainly be a mix.
  11. It seems like an important reason for this is economic inequality. Most of the violence we've seen in Sweden in recent times has come from poorer neighborhoods, which do tend to have more immigrants in them. However, based my research so far, I can't tell if these neighborhoods are poor because of immigration, or if it's because of other policies. A lot of people here seem to be assuming it's just the former, but I think we should be careful with jumping to such conclusions. Is the problem here really immigration, or is it poor integration of immigrants and economic policies that have increased inequality in Sweden?
  12. Be careful with assuming that since there are two sides to an issue, that both sides are equally valid. Sure, there are a lot of people who don't believe in vaccines. But who are they? Are they biologists, virologists or similar? If not, why should we take their claims seriously. That's the problem with the anti-vaccination side; it's not really backed up by any substantial evidence, and yet, lots of people now don't know if they can trust vaccines or not because there are still lots of people saying they are bad for you, without any proper evidence on their side. While it's great to explore different perspectives and opinions on controversial issues, there is only so much time to study different perspectives and a virtually unlimited supply of different perspectives to explore, so you have to pick your battles wisely. Instead of focusing too much on the anti-vaxxer perspective, how about spending that time learning about different perspectives on vaccine distribution. There are legitimate debates about which groups should be vaccinated before others for example. There are also interesting discussions about how society should adjust back to normal after the pandemic goes over, as well as what we can learn from this pandemic and our response to it, and how we might deal with similar issues in the future. But we can't really get to that point if we're still debating whether vaccines are effective or not.
  13. The Associated Press is generally really good at just reporting news without any significant bias. Although I've been quite skeptical of them since they fired one of their journalsts for her pro-Palestinian opinions. Reuters also seems pretty good. I also like to check with fact checking websites like Snopes or Factcheck.org. They are generally pretty unbiased and nuanced. Wikipedia is actually also a great place to get mostly unbiased information, but isn't really made for keeping up with current events. I usually like to use it to read up on background information about current events whenever I need more context on something.
  14. I thought it was great and eye opening. It really gave me something to think about and start applying more consciously in my life.
  15. You should probably start another thread for that. Edit: And also, your link doesn't lead to your tracks. I clicked on it and it just took me to my own profile.