Ulax

Member
 View profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    3,891

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Ulax

  3. Posted · Edited by Ulax

    On 4/21/2024 at 3:45 PM, Princess Arabia said:

    Guys need to start listening to women sometimes on these issues because we're the ones you're approaching and trying to date or whatever. I'm coming from a place where i'm not bitter towards men and have been approached many times in my life. I can say which ones seemed to be just a numbers game or who don't really care if I say yes or no to and those guys I tend to avoid because I can tell it won't be worth my time and energy. Not saying to not approach many times, but in the thousands is not worth it in the end if your main aim is to actually interact.

    @Princess Arabia With respect, its not really, or at least shouldn't be, a question listening to men over women. Its about listening to people who have direct experience going through a certain learning process.

    If you haven't gone through the learning process of getting good at something, then how can you competently teach/ advise people on how to improve at that something?

    Women haven't gone through the learning process of being a man getting attractive with women, so how can they competently teach it?*

    Its the same as if some dude, who has never significantly improved his dating skills, tries to advise on how to improve male dating success with women. His advice is severely limited because he hasn't gone through the learning process himself.

    (* Slight exception if someone spends a lot of time going through the learning process of coaching how to get good at a certain something.)

  13. Posted · Edited by Ulax

    2 hours ago, zurew said:

    If you accept that argument then it deletes itself, because whats the justification for the epistemic regress argument? ( you are still inside the regress problem) + there are responses to that argument ie coherentism and foundationalism.

     

    @zurew yeah lol. I lol because I debated this with a former housemate for like a year on the same points.

    Its hard to argue on the topic because the entire idea of what is a good argument is what is up for debate. 

    How can we judge whether the epistemic regress argument is better than coherentism or foundationalism arguments, when the whole debate is about how to judge an argument. 

  21. Posted

    I think you'd need to find a way of meeting whatever core needs their belief in rigid ideology meets for them. Imo, in these types of debates all that is happening is the lower consciousness party is continually just trying to keep their needs being met. I.e. need for belonging, need for understanding of the world.

    Non violent communication could be a useful resource for understanding this further imo. 

  24. Posted

    5 hours ago, BlueOak said:

    I think it's because I refused to believe that the people making decisions wanted things to get to this point. I was trusting their emotions were what drove them, even though I knew better. It's obvious theater meant for the masses.

    The people who thought, let's do this and get it over with, won out months ago. It's been obvious from the pattern. 

    Damaging Iran can delay its nuclear threat.
    Takes a military ally away from BRICS for a while.
    Hurts their influence throughout the Middle East (threats to fuel and trade).
    Stops drone shipments to Russia.

    If I had to predict, it would be an excuse to hit various Iranian proxies that threaten trade, Iranian weapon/drone factories, and their nuclear sites.

    It does require Iran to keep doing what Israel, America, and the UK leadership want them to do. Responding on cue.

    Please note all of this is still stupid, in no way do I support WW3 starting, which has a much-increased chance during this period.

    I see. interesting take. Hadn't thought about it that way. But makes sense.