Bobby_2021

Ever since I have been recording my insights on my laptop. I rarely go back to read it all. But it gives me insight into myself and repeating patterns that occur in my thought processes. To be frank, I have to admit that I like writing down my insights if it is done electronically. I still do not get the appeal with writing it down on a paper. It is too slow and you might even forget what you were writing down in the first place. There is an even better advantage in that I can feed it to some AI who could help me even more with helping me know myself. This is a good reason to keep writing down your thoughts. I suggest you do it electronically.

Every being had to cope through life to reach till this point. I think it is quite worthy of admiration that they have made it till far even though they have been wounded and traumatized in the process. This is a good enough reason to respect every being. This is not like you respect someone out of compassion or sympathy. I do not like that. This is a reason to respect every creature because they are a winner. They managed to survive in a world where plenty perish. That definitely needs some admiration.

@Emerald Feel free not to engage. I am contributing to the information in the thread for those who want to read it and enlighten their perspective. The disconnect is in how subtly you make everything personal on an completely impersonal topic and feel offended since it has become personal for you. There is no "you" or "me" in conversations at all.

This is such a vague and loaded statement with many many layers of interpretations. Generally you lose the "innocence" with experience. It's not necessarily a good or bad thing. Some prefer the experience and others, the innocence. That's a statement about the preference of the guy who made that statement. It's not an attack on woman's agency, for those individuals who do take agency. It is to protect women who do not have agency, who are a significant share of the women's population. Note that vast majority of women are in no position to have agency due to their life circumstances. And yes, it does come at some cost to women who does take agency. You are entitled to perceive that as an infringement of your agency. But your agency, if normalised to all women, will result in lots of more women in taken advantage of by male sexual predators. At the end of the day, what do you value more? Your own agency, or the safety of the women who do not take/have agency?

Suffering is unavoidable. Better suffer for something you value. In that case you feel like the suffering was justified.

When I say men are taller than women, you say "but my boyfriend is shorter than me". You are mixing up general statements with the specifics of your personal life or what someone on this thread commented which are hardly related. General statements should be treated as generalities. If you make it personal, then you would feel like I am arguing with you, but in reality it had absolutely nothing to do with you at all. It's all about how you obfuscate generalities with your personal life and mine.

@Emerald I was adding on top of it. No intentions to argue with you. I wasn't talking about my girlfriend. I was talking in generalities. You guys mix up the generalities with the specifics not even knowing there is a difference. If you make a general statement, then I reply in generalized statements. If I say women in general don't take enough agency, you counter it with "Oh I take agency in my life" as if it is countering my statement at all. You don't have to defend statements that aren't about you. They are general statements. And don't make general statement about women into the specifics of your personal life.

The chances are he already decided for you in case you weren't in the mood to decide. If I say black guys are black in colour, you will still say that I am assuming, because black people can also be white in colour. Of course the things that I have said is a generalisation. It's okay to generalize. Which is why I used the word "most". If I say men are taller than women, that's not an assumption. It's doesn't mean that all men are taller than all women. It means that most men are generally taller than most women. And you would be correct 95% of the time. You cannot ignore that 95% for the sake of 5%. You are pointing out the 5% as if it discredits the experience of the 95%. It doesn't. I can still talk about the 95%. You keep doing this over and over again, although it's totally understandable. Stereotypes will always exist. Some of it is bullshit and others have some substance to them. The stereotypes held in the media and propagated to the general public is despicable. There are also commonly held stereotypes because they are mostly true. These are stereotypes that has some substance behind them. In the latter cases, you will simply have to deal with it upfront. Because most women shy away from taking agency, men have no option to take matters into their own hands. This might end up taking away agency from women who are bold enough to accept it.

Well admitting that there is indeed psychopathy among surgeons is huge. Then the next logical step is to ask why is there psychopathy among surgeons. You will get some explanations. Those same explanations apply to regular doctors as well, but to a lesse extent. A regular person visits doctor plenty of times in their life making it more likely to having visited a psychopath whom you trust with your life.

Psychopathy is 6 times more prevalent in doctors(surgeons) than the general public. Prof Sam Vaknin describes it in immaculate detail. If you feel uncomfortable with a doctor because you asked a couple of questions or challenged their authority, find a new one. I am sure you have similar experiences in the past of such doctors. They are surprisingly common and also unsurprising looking at the way the industry is designed. Stay safe out there. And always consult multiple doctors before serious surgeries or major medical procedures. Have some doctors you personally know for consultations, if possible, to reduce the likelihood of them using your body for their experimentations. This explains so much of my experiences while dealing with them.

Haha In YouTube you have no choice but to Target the average viewer to drive up revenue. She can't stick to her idealism on Yt as well. I agree that some of it is cringe. I used to watch her long back and then unsubbed. Her video on Nuclear energy was good.

The case with surgeons was an exaggeration to prove a point. It doesn't mean that there is no psychopathy among general doctors. It also applies to doctors, but to a lesser extent. I have visited several doctors who tried to scheme into getting unnecessary tests & lab work, talk for too long on their own lives when they were free, tried to scare me for petty lumps etc. And I am not even someone who visits the doctors so often. Have you watched the video? I have seen plenty of people online who appears to support these claims.

Like what? YouTube survival games.

That claim is applicable for surgeons, not doctors in general. I have corrected it in the original post. But for real though, psychopathy has some overrepresentation among surgeons. The original claim is made by the expert on cluster B personality disorders, Sam Vaknin. (Video is linked) The claim is not widely absurd. There are also articles that shows validity to such claims.

IF you want men to honor your agency, you need to act like you have one. Men are more than willing to give enough agency to women if they can show him that they can handle it. Most women want their man to decide where to eat, plan where to go, what to speak and make those little decisions. You do not wait for others to give agency to you. You can already see the message you will be sending him. So he will be the one who have agency by default. Women are free to take it into their own hands. Most women will do not. Agency will require you to handle matters more directly and communicate clearly. All you can do that, then men will not stand in your way. In fact they will be even more welcoming.

It would have absolutely broken my heart to see them making a mockery of something as beautiful as Physics & Cosmology.

But something tells me that it has gotten so rotten after 2020 as opposed to 2010. Or it could be the case that social media is making the corruption and bullshit so glaringly obvious, among other things. Most people coming to academia are doing so for idealistic reason like to advance the frontier of knowledge for humanity. They do know yet that they are going to be playing even more survival games in academia. It pays to first take care of survival and then do real science like Sabine did.

Because she dedicated her whole life to advancing physics. We live and think every day on physical and the questions about existence. So petty stuff will not be held in the same grounds as physics at all.

1. Ukraine would not have been invaded if they had nukes in the first place. 2. Ukraine would not have been invaded if you did not allow their entry into NATO. (muh open door) This is after explicit warning from Russian foreign ministry. (All related documents linked in the last post I made in this thread.) 3. If Ukraine had joined NATO, you are risking nuclear war among two entities with the biggest stockpile of nuclear weapons in the world. 4. Fund the war with the tax money from the average American when America itself is swarmed by hundreds and thousands of illegal immigrants and collapsing social order. Even people of Ukraine do not want to keep fighting this war. The only people winning are the heads of the miliary industrial complex. All major wars (and genocide) in the 21st century happened due to bad policy making of the United States. It's appalling that people are still in denial about this.

Jesus, if this is what is happening in Germany, you could already imagine what is happening in less developed parts of the world including the states. Dodged a bullet by not pursuing academia further than a degree although this was the career path expected of me from myself. Reality has a harsh way of bursting your bubble. People should really be more honest and work explicitly on survival the right way before we delve in to more serious stuff like science or philosophy.

Strongly agree.

A random guess.

As far as people who do get sucked into these niche ideologies like red pill, incel etc most of it has to do with a lack of self awareness. They simply cannot look at themselves doing this shit. Also a big part of the problem is also that it gets tied to your identity and you get mired into group think. This is why it's not a good idea to declare yourself belonging to any ideology, publicly. If you want to be a member of such groups do so in private and leave it when you exhausted the karma. You would feel no obligation to defend your position forever.

Are you suffering more now than you used to? I assume yes.

The relationships are a bit complicated. Being low in IQ means that you are likely to earn less money over the lifetime. This is true of Individuals and communities. On the other hand, if you are a high IQ individual being born in a poor country, then you cannot generate much wealth over your lifetime, unless you migrate to a developed country. IQ needs societal infrastructure to be nurtured and it takes high IQ people to build that infrastructure. The relationship is not straightforward. Happiness does correlate with wealth. The more wealth you have the happier you feel. IQ is a good predictor of wealth, but it is not perfect. IF you want to explore the relationship between IQ and happiness alone, then I would say that your happiness increases from 100-125. From 125 to above and more, you are more likely to be miserable and suffer with each point increase in IQ. So, the relationship is not linear. IQ also increases your capacity to suffer, beyond a point. So, after that point, which is roughly around 125-130, you will suffer a lot. Because society is not built to accommodate you. You will feel left out and forgotten. Society is made for midwits. Dumb and depressed usually do not go hand in hand. Although all these statements are a massive generalization. The circumstances you are in have to do with it a lot. High IQ people are more likely to be depressed. And they come from rich countries. There is a sweet spot when it comes to IQ & wealth. You will be severely miserable if you are out of that zone, both in IQ and wealth. Average IQ of a philosophy major is 130. So yeah, your ability to do philosophy or spirituality is dependent on your IQ. Is the relationship perfect? no. But it tends to be the case more often than not. To be interested in abstract stuff like philosophy and spirituality is a high IQ trait.