tenta

Member
 View profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    735

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by tenta

  2. Posted

    28 minutes ago, tsuki said:

    That may be true for some more sophisticated, abstract, hierarchies but does not explain things like military supremacy.
    A policeman can arrest you, possibly beat you up, and even press charges for resisting.
    You do not obey the law only because you believe that he will (hopefully!).

    A person at a certain point in the hierarchy has to be able to perform the duties that are required of him/her.
    This ability to perform the duties is constituted in personal power that is not derived from the hierarchy and is grounded in belief only to some extent (self worth). You actually have to be competent to be a CEO for a long period of time.

    Of course, the hierarchy itself does provide power (resources) for the ones that are high in its ranks, but this power is not the only thing that these people work with. Power breeds more power. That's why egos are so addicted to it.

    Other people can do that, but the policeman could get away with it because of the set hierarchy

    "This ability to perform the duties is constituted in personal power that is not derived from the hierarchy and is grounded in belief only to some extent (self worth)." Yes that is true, but it wouldn't work if you weren't at the top of the hierarchy, and you could have this but not climb the hierarchy

  3. Posted

    33 minutes ago, electroBeam said:

    Hierarchies are problematic because they impose gender inequality, wage slavery, lack of fairness, strategies that serve the business instead of humanity, etc. We need to end hierarchies for these reasons, but not because of the reasons in medieval Europe.

     

    Ofcourse, they're designed to be good for the top 10% or so and are designed for narcissists who aren't going to admit they won unfairly and try to keep the hierarchy

    Sure they don't give you as much power as they did in medieval times, but do they still do it to another extend, without a major change hierarchies will attract sociopaths because that's inherent to hierarchy as we know it

    If you stop respecting someone above you in the hierarchy will his orders stop having the same effect? No, you'll still be punished if you don't follow orders an play the role of someone who hasn't worked as hard as them and doesn't have as high of an IQ or whatever, it doesn't have to be respect it can be not wanting negative consequences

  6. Posted

    6 hours ago, Parththakkar12 said:

    Everyone is basically calling masculinity toxic, i.e. being a man is a bad thing now. Aggression is bad/dangerous, stating the facts is mansplaining, power/authority is oppressive, competition is sexism, women can do everything men can do so men have no value, etc. All of this is circle-jerked among feminists. The explanation is 'No we're not anti-male, we just make an enemy of everything that is masculine!'

     

    So is everyone saying this or is this just feminist rhetoric? It's more nuanced than a lot of people saying "competition is sexism"

  8. Posted

    Just now, Leo Gura said:

    In a modern corporation you will not rise to the top unless you are exceptionally good at your job. But even so, that doesn't justify the exploitation of those below you.

     

    Or you could be a family member of the CEO, and  someone who is zealous about believing in the hierarchy and defending it at all cost to prove their own superiority AKA someone who is more likely to join/climb it for that reason, will be much more inclined to exploit those below them

  9. Posted

    The fact that people who are high up the hierarchy are known for that instead of other qualities points to something, hard work of the people at the top of the hierarchy is much more highlighted so it reinforces the belief that hard work is what got them there when in reality there are others working hard and having the qualities they're highlighting

  10. Posted

    The hierarchy is what is giving them power, so it's x causing y, not y causing x, you can have power which can help you get at the top of the hierarchy but most of the time the power they have is coming from the hierarchy and others believing in the hierarchy - having beliefs about how the hierarchy is valid

    To someone like Jordan Peterson there is only: the hierarchy which is just obviously allegedly going to put the hardest working, highest IQ, moral people at the top

    Ofc this will not be admitted because there are many mechanisms and mental gymnastics to make sure a hierarchy or a narcissist fantasy isn't shattered, such as punishing people who question or ignoring/banning criticism, or trying to keep the hierarchy clear but also a little subtle (if it's too blatant/clear the egos and devils at the bottom will leave and it will cause more controversy) why would it be easy for an ego to give up one of the things that people spend tons of money/effort on (like someone spending 500$ to become a moderator on an online forum).

  11. Posted

    If Trump was smarter he would be laughing about his chances, especially if he is somehow able to run in 2024, nationalism is unquestioned by people, so is their limited group identity and the idea that their family matters way more and that an immigrant just isn't working as hard as you because they didn't get into the US - when these things are so unquestioned (very strong cards for a politician to play as seen in the recent UK election) and when people value political group identity way more than things that would help them (free college, UBI, free medicare) then trump's chances are good

    Your conservative youtube viewer will see a video by the daily wire, saying that it's very unfair to billionaires to make them (indirectly) pay for medicare for all, and this could obviously not sit right with them, but they will easily brush it off as no big deal because political group zealotry is just more important when they've been indoctrinated into that from birth and invested a lot into it

    "So what if the stage blue and orange people don't question the things listed above, surely Bernie will just get more people voting for him because he's a better candidate than crooked hillary?" Well Biden is currently polling considerably above Bernie and has been for a long time, because the US isn't ready of a candidate as progressive as Bernie and there's a lot of knee-jerk reactions to him, if Biden is the nominee then things will play out like in the 2016 election and Trump will win against a centrist candidate as predicted by people who've successfully predicted previously elections

  13. Posted · Edited by tenta

    Just now, Bazooka Jesus said:

    It's been twenty hours now that I left a screening of The Joker... holy fuck. I am still kind of speechless, which does not happen to me very often when it comes to movies.

    In all honesty, I don't think that I am able to judge this movie "objectively" (if such a thing is possible at all); it hit way too close to home for that. During my watching of it, I felt like the screen had transformed into a huge mirror and displayed all of my deepest and ugliest insecurities for all the world to see. WOW.

    If there is any justice left in Hollywood whatsoever, Joaquin Phoenix will walk home with a golden statue in his pocket in early February, no doubt about it.

     

    It's surprisingly well done because of how other media try to conform but this movie doesn't, especially near the end which is the most surprising part of it and it was really good, clearly the movie of the year and what was needed in 2019

  17. Posted

    6 hours ago, Derek White said:

    This debate is so stupid. Prager claims the vacation is because of Christmas but it's really because of the winter. Obviously, secular people are going to use happy holidays. Literally nobody gets offended if you say Merry Christmas. It just goes to show how much of a snowflake Mr. Prager is, perfect example of stage blue purism. 

    Happy holidays is literally wishing you happy holidays, and he claims to be offended and doesn't see the hypocrisy.

  19. Posted

    Nothing about what JP is saying is new or revolutionary, he is just defending previous beliefs from new beliefs, but to people agreeing with him it won't seem that way because they've already readied their mental gymnastics, so believing Jordan Peterson is revolutionary or very original isn't difficult, it's well self-serving

    There is no good argument here for why the hierarchies are based on competence, just believing the people at the top of the hierarchy (about their claims of being higher IQ than others etc.) and demonizing people who don't believe them (that he calls neo-marxists)

  20. Posted

    The saying is tied to nationalism and stage blue.

    On 12/26/2019 at 7:00 PM, Husseinisdoingfine said:

    Leo has already covered Prager U in his blog, stating that is a 'stage blue' channel, promoting family values, etc... Which teeters to 'stage orange' when it talk about how fossil fuels and tax cuts are a nice thing.

    The amazing thing about spiral dynamics is that it explains political behaviors so well for me. Now I know why Christians, people part of a religion that called free commerce, 'sinful', vote for the bull market Republicans. It's because that's where they are in development.

    Trump is a bad representative of the values they claim to have, he only has to reflect willful ignorance or callousness to get elected

  21. Posted

     

    So unless someone excludes people who celebrate Christmas at a different time of the year or don't celebrate it, they're not being inclusive towards you? That's not how it works, this just comes from a delusion of superiority that justifies that type of double standard

    "Merry Christmas" is clearly a non inclusive phrase, it's the opposite, and could also hint at dehumanizing the people it excludes, but the perception right wingers have is that people on the left want to "secularize society" instead... 

    A saying that simply doesn't exclude people as if they deserve it, isn't preventing you from celebrating holidays

  23. Posted

    Just now, Tanz said:

    The movie is definitely spiral dynamics green.... if the world he was living in caring for the disenfranchised and mentally ill then joker would not have become joker.

    If the movie was stage yellow, it would have offered a solution and growth from the characters, particularly the Thomas Wayne character whom was a person that was stage orange believing he is stage green and seeking office for the sake of the people of gotham city.    

     

    A stage yellow movie will always push an exact solution? One of the reasons it's yellow is because it managed to be so popular by being non-conformist but not too much like that, so it appeals to audiences by finding that balance and so has become the highest earning comic book film, it's still not solid yellow tho.

    It's successful because it pushes a new perspective in contrast to other movie perspectives, like the story writer went meta.

  24. Posted

    After watching the movie, it's stage yellow, and it exceeded my expectations, there is so so much conformity right now that the Joker movie was simply powerful breaks that, especially Joker's speech where he pointed out the self bias of thomas wayne and others. Sadly Joker didn't represent egolessness from what we see in the end of the movie.

    I'd like to see what happens to Bruce Wayne after this in a sequel.