User Controls
The Retarded Thread: Click Here for AIDS
-
2017-06-13 at 9:53 PM UTC
-
2017-06-13 at 9:54 PM UTCTHAT DOES NOT FUCKING COUNT
-
2017-06-13 at 9:57 PM UTCWell what is it then? This is too difficult.
-
2017-06-13 at 10 PM UTCYou gave it an earnest try, mmQ. I can't fault you for not getting it, but it was well played.
-
2017-06-13 at 11:57 PM UTCI have my suspicion that roughly 5 new posters here are scron. He tries to give them their own unique typing style, lexicon, personality and opinions but the meth and his general lunacy prevent him from fully breaking his own character traits.
-
2017-06-14 at 12:11 AM UTC
-
2017-06-14 at 12:16 AM UTC
-
2017-06-14 at 12:30 AM UTC
-
2017-06-14 at 1:21 AM UTC
-
2017-06-14 at 1:31 AM UTCAlso this shit go hard AF Fam
-
2017-06-14 at 2:33 AM UTC
Originally posted by Captain Falcon I didn't say that you said that genes are selfish in a human sense. But there is no such thing as "selfish genes". That's not a thing.
Oh, wait, I was referring to the gene centric view of evolution. The term slipped my mind. From this you could flesh out an ethical argument about the natural propensities of man and why the life itself should be ascribed a negative value. One of many arguments in support of the misanthropic and anti-natalist viewpoints. -
2017-06-14 at 2:38 AM UTCOh, Captain Falcon, how old are you? Just curious because you certainly don't come off as young (Like, early to mid 20s) and I'm wondering how long it took you to achieve your current state in life.
-
2017-06-14 at 2:58 AM UTC
Originally posted by Malice Oh brother, I thought you two had a falling out based on how lovey dovey and happy you seemed when you started posting again.
This guy, can't even go a week without becoming severely depressed again and wanting to kill himself.
BTW, a tip for now: If you want a certain medication you should never directly ask for it in any form, this is one of the worst strategies you can use (I'm not assuming it's what you did, you could just have rotten luck). You have to lie and claim you were on it before, but your last psychiatrist wouldn't prescribe it, or that you moved and lost your insurance, so you couldn't get it again. Either way, claim it's the only thing that's ever worked for you, at least for certain symptoms if you need multiple drugs (Not a good idea if you're aiming for an MAOI, they probably won't want to prescribe multiple things). Just sort of guide them into agreeing or suggesting something themselves.
Lie about your background and make yourself look as sad as possible as well. Although, with your genuine history, this may not be necessary. And don't tell them about any suicide attempts or thoughts because they may not want to prescribe anything you can overdose on.
Please stop trying to give me advice. -
2017-06-14 at 3:35 AM UTCPoC, you are the most oversensitive person ever. You're still afraid of anyone getting close to you or attempting to help you (except this mystery woman in your life). Incredibly moody as well.
It's not as if I consider you or anyone else a friend. I keep everyone at a distance and simply enjoy posting here. I've given tons of people advice, it's not as if you're special or I feel sorry for you.
You are rude. Hmm, I'm pretty much the last person that should complain about this... -
2017-06-14 at 3:38 AM UTCDon't take it personally Mal. You're fine, but have a tendency to get on people's nerves at times.
-
2017-06-14 at 3:50 AM UTCTwo day break is over, time to smoke some weed. *rubs hands*
Bling blonicus!
I also enjoy a tip-top narcotic high, fellow drug users. -
2017-06-14 at 3:54 AM UTC
Originally posted by Malice There's an interesting argument to be made that with selfish genes as the foundational factor for the behavior of life in general, with a specific focus on humanity, human beings can be said to be inherently evil. It's not a new thought, but some time ago I reasoned that behind the traits generally considered to be the most positive aspects of man, e.g. love and altruism, they are in fact some of the harmful driving forces, with selfishness always behind them (This is by no means a novel argument), and almost inevitably lead to injustice and negative utility.
"Altruism is Impossible/Not Really Altruism" and other self congratulatory, semantic, at times circular, and wholly tired arguments, by Malice, available in dumpsters behind non-existent bookstores now!I'm reading Technological Slavery: The Collected Writings of Theodore J. Kaczynski, a.k.a. "The Unabomber", and found it amusing that right in the foreword, written in 2009, he still blatantly states:
4. What is needed is a new revolutionary movement, dedicated to the elimination of technological society, that will take measures to exclude all leftists
Sorry Lanny, despite your goal of examining the ills produced by modern industrial society, you clearly aren't needed or wanted. You have contributed immensely to our technological serfdom simply to fulfill your own selfish desires. Even outside of your career, you contribute immensely to our harm simply by participating in highly consumptive modern technological society; aside from the short sighted view of fixation on what is directly purchased, a fairly minimalist lifestyle, there is a vast chain of exploitation and harm that is required simply to support your existence in a highly advanced society, necessitating enormous capital.
Post last edited by Malice at 2017-06-13T20:13:26.560092+00:00
You don't actually buy Kaczynski's argument for a second, at best you're enamored with the author because he's edgy and used murder to get a screed against boogymen "leftists" published.
I also like how I'm a terrific driving force in the world when you want to act like technology is bad but an impotent cog when it's good. -
2017-06-14 at 4:13 AM UTC
Originally posted by Malice Oh, wait, I was referring to the gene centric view of evolution. The term slipped my mind. From this you could flesh out an ethical argument about the natural propensities of man and why the life itself should be ascribed a negative value. One of many arguments in support of the misanthropic and anti-natalist viewpoints.
My point stands regardless, utilitarianism might be at odds with the behaviour of creatures with no higher order reasoning, but it works fine with human society, as humans have the capacity for higher order reasoning (and at least apparently) to buck their basic genetically dictated behaviours on a basic level. For example, we can forgo having sex and eating as much as we can in order to store fat.
Or rather, we have these abilities as a result of our genetics (arguably), so perhaps the "selfish gene" does not apply whatsoever to modern humans, as our genetics have turned away from evolutionarily stable strategy. -
2017-06-14 at 4:14 AM UTC
-
2017-06-14 at 4:23 AM UTC
