User Controls
The Retarded Thread: Click Here for AIDS
-
2017-07-18 at 3:12 PM UTCNo need to suck the joy out of my joke with that brick wall.
I think it's maybe not a good idea to get lobotomized in general, y'know. -
2017-07-18 at 3:14 PM UTCHave you studied Tesla, Malice?
-
2017-07-18 at 3:20 PM UTCToo high to take the train.
-
2017-07-18 at 3:22 PM UTCAlso, I just realized I may have a form of eidetic memory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eidetic_memory
Until yesterday, when reading more about ASD, I had the mistaken perception that this was not the case because I could not simply look at something, such as a page with writing on it, and recall it. While reading it was mentioned that exceptional long-term memory that is finely detailed with a high level of fidelity is common, if not standard, among ASD. Later the term "filmographic" was used along with a brief description.
Except for mine it's tied to social interaction, events in my own life, and emotion.
It really is similar to a video that can be recalled, skipped through, possibly even played backward or with speed alterations.
Although I may also have prosopagnosia, mild face blindness: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosopagnosia
I don't know if it's due to the extreme aversion to eye contact and asociality, simply not having enough time to ever look at a face long enough to memorize the enormous amount of detail and associated meaning, or a neurological deficit. I'm already incredibly bad at remembering names (along with dates, which was actually mentioned as two of the things aspies tend to be bad at memorizing), not being able to tell who someone is, especially if they're east-asian, could lead to incredibly awkward events. Hmm, no, recalling the past, I've never had an issue with this, people do tend to look distinct. But, as for faces in my memory, they're oddly absent. They're just very vague and lacking in detail, I'm unable to focus on anything distinct, like they're just blurred in a way. I honestly can't bring to mind a highly detailed memory of any face I've seen. -
2017-07-18 at 3:32 PM UTCThe optimal level of happiness. Diminishing returns to attempts to increase net well-being in life based on research related to the hedonic treadmill and the costs.
Ultimately you can reduce happiness, as with many other things, as being similar to a multivitamin. Something necessary for proper biological function. Certainly it can be excessive, merely ponder mania, or thought experiments involving wire heads.
Then an argument against seeking happiness primarily based on my interpretation of original Buddhist ideology as well as the heavy detrimental effects and costs involved as well as the inverse, the benefits gained. Abandon your desire for happiness, abandon happiness itself. An explanation for why my goal in life is not to be happy, to be as happy as possible, and why I consider this to be an exceedingly crude goal.
"Why don't you care about happiness (as others do)?"
"Evoking emotional states is not my goal in life."
Originally posted by Lanny Lol, gamma knife equipment is pretty damn rare, I really doubt you're going to get scheduled to lobotomize yourself because autism
Oh please, as if I would do it in the US. Medical tourism, honey. Yes, I'm fully aware of the various potential risks, that extensive research is required, but there are locations that specifically cater to 1st world medical tourists, with some doctors even trained in the US, all staff speaking fluent english, who offer very high quality service for far lower out of pocket prices. US healthcare isn't even that good, you'd have to pay a fuckton and be pretty fucking rich to afford private surgery that can surpass what the optimal choice in the medical tourism market has to offer. There are simply a multitude of critical factors that immensely inflate prices (no need to discuss what the optimal system would be, whether "capitalism" is the root cause (certainly seems to work quite well for the medical tourist market)).
It's only around 10K total. The basis for procedure is really quite brilliant as an alternative to traditional invasive surgery, despite the concept being fairly simple.
Check this out if you're curious, I became aware of it years ago. Luxurious:
Originally posted by hydromorphone People give a bad rep to ALL foreign, S.E. Asian hospitals/elective procedures preformed, but really, there are some super nice hospitals, with experienced physician's. You hear horror stories and shit, particularly with bob-jobs, but… shit can and does happen even in the best of American/European hospitals too, all the time. It doesn't get talked about as much, since in the case of "vacation procedures", they don't have the long term care and follow up that they might have if they were residents and could return for those things. People generally stay just long enough to be able to fly back home for the cost issue. Don't think surgeries don't get botched anywhere else, and mostly, the case comes from infection, which again can happen anywhere from poor after care due to the patient not following appropriate aftercare instructions. It doesn't mean the doctor did a damn thing wrong.
This is true. There's a strong anti-foreign bias that's well supported. It stems from the inherent tribal nature of man.
Post last edited by Malice at 2017-07-18T15:34:33.088280+00:00 -
2017-07-18 at 3:38 PM UTC
Originally posted by Lanny It was surprisingly good, although every character than isn't Kobayashi or Kana is a waste of screentime. I'm thinking about reading the manga in Japanese, the reading level required for it is supposed to be rather low.
We can all guess who Kobayashi instantly reminded us of.
Originally posted by Sophie Nicu. And it was really good imho. Also i don't think i agree with you on the characters, Kanna was super moe but her little friend Saikawa was 11/10 kawaii. And i think the cast of characters was just nice to have together although Fafnir was bretty lame.
I had seen some mentions of Kanna using the meme T H I C C, but I had no idea what they were talking about. That was, until a certain a scene finally showcased her thighs. Good lord, those are not realistic proportions for a girl her age. Well, you know what I mean.
I've only seen it up to episode for and so far it's been kind of boring, tbh. I'll try to finish it due to high rating and acclaim, but I expected much more due to the aforementioned. -
2017-07-18 at 3:45 PM UTCAll this cringime talk but none of you can tell me the opposite of moe.
Weak. -
2017-07-18 at 3:57 PM UTC
Originally posted by Malice We can all guess who Kobayashi instantly reminded us of.
She codes Python for a living.
Originally posted by Malice I had seen some mentions of Kanna using the meme T H I C C, but I had no idea what they were talking about. That was, until a certain a scene finally showcased her thighs. Good lord, those are not realistic proportions for a girl her age. Well, you know what I mean.
I hadn't noticed until you just mentioned it. Like i said, Kanna was moe for me, i liked her friend Saikawa better for lolicon reasons but i am not sure if you met her yet.
Originally posted by Malice I've only seen it up to episode for and so far it's been kind of boring, tbh. I'll try to finish it due to high rating and acclaim, but I expected much more due to the aforementioned.
Obviously, you me and Lanny experience the same anime in a very different way. -
2017-07-18 at 4:14 PM UTC
-
2017-07-18 at 4:21 PM UTC
Originally posted by Sophie I hadn't noticed until you just mentioned it. Like i said, Kanna was moe for me, i liked her friend Saikawa better for lolicon reasons but i am not sure if you met her yet.
I've gotten to the school episode where they meet. Currently she seems really annoying, a terrible person.
This was the exact scene where I realized what they were talking about with regard to Kanna.
It may have been the first scene where it was conspicuous. Afterward I couldn't stop noticing it. -
2017-07-18 at 4:25 PM UTC
-
2017-07-18 at 4:36 PM UTCDidn't read.
-
2017-07-18 at 4:41 PM UTCill kill your eyes
-
2017-07-18 at 4:57 PM UTCblood clot
-
2017-07-18 at 5:32 PM UTCdid I post here recently
I forgot
This is fucking KCrazy
-
2017-07-18 at 5:49 PM UTCHeh, found some very important information on autism/ASD and IQ scores/(general) intelligence that will irk sploo quite nicely. I think I'll make a thread about it.
-
2017-07-18 at 6:03 PM UTCuh uh uh
bling blaww burr i put diamonds in the spliff -
2017-07-18 at 7:30 PM UTCThe resurgence of negative utilitarianism. I love it, I'm genuinely enamored with anti-natalism and how it can further be developed for the involuntary (hardy har har) extermination of the human race, of all life. I can even tie in possible solutions to the problems of identity and consciousness, which will require enormous work, based on my interpretation of the original teachings of Buddhism, the justification for the concept of no-self, that the concepts of identity and consciousness are untenable, "illusory", and ultimately there is no fundamental difference between this state and death. No, that isn't quite it. It's excruciatingly difficult to explain, unsurprisingly, as these may be the most difficult problems in philosophy and neuroscience, my two principle interests. Even without my argument on the nature of what we perceive to identity and consciousness, the argument for the end of all life in existence, its desirability, is still sound.
That after all this time there could still be room to seriously posit something as extreme as this, following in the lineage of such great men as Buddha, Schopenhauer, and Benatar, attempting to unify and complete their work. What a wonderful opportunity for a person passionate about entering the field of philosophy.
Lanny, what's your opinion on negative utilitarianism?
Also, I forgot to mention this. I was searching for an old post of mine and came across something you wrote two years ago, which brought it to mind:Life has no inherent meaning, I am unable to find satisfactory subjective value. Of course that doesn't make me feel better.
Have you ever seriously engaged with the works of any existentialist philosopher? If you don't mind something a little dry I'd suggest Sartre's Existentialism is a Humanism or Camus' The Stranger or The Myth of Sisyphus (the former is a novel, the latter an essay. The Stranger is probably more fun to read but more cryptic/open to interpretation than Sisyphus). You should also make an effort to avoid complecting politics in the equation (Sartre was largely a communist, Camus rejected communism and that came through in The Stranger and Heidegger (another famous existentialist) joined the nazi party during WWII so the mindset kind runs the gamut of political positions. I'm not saying it's going to change your life or whatever but I think the works from that movement are interesting, firstly, and secondly the classical existentialists do a really excellent job of, at least, cataloging and recognizing the anguish of an honest confrontation with modern society and it's issues but also giving us a way of thinking about our situation in honestly and without self delusion and still finding some solace or even happiness in it.
Amazingly, I'm actually a complete novice in philosophy. Prior to this I had the same common misconceptions about it having no practical value, being unable to find answers/solutions, ultimately leading nowhere. That and the view that ultimately everything was unknowable/uncertain.
I distinctly recall that I developed an interest in existentialism at some point during the 3 year period of suicidal depression. The reason was quite cliche, a desperate final attempt to find a compelling reason to live. No answer I came across, nothing I had ever read, in fiction or philosophy, felt satisfying, ultimately everything posited appeared to be fundamentally flawed and untenable.
I don't think I began taking philosophy somewhat seriously until sometime this year, really within the last 4 months or so. The reason I may be to grasp it so quickly is due to my abnormal/atypical neurology and mind along with the enormous widespread knowledge base I'm able to utilize to form connections and derivatives. I'll spare the details.
Certainly I'm not deluded enough to believe I'm remarkable or even necessarily show promise at this point, or am even knowledgeable. Fortunately I have that legendary aspie obsession to kick into high gear, particularly once studies are focused on it. Imagine if I became as monomaniacle about philosophy as I have about autism and its neurology, which I accomplished solely as an amateur interest, with no formal education. It is astounding how underinformed, uninformed, and misinformed even the majority of ASD specialists are. Simply attempt an erudite conversation on neuroscience, neuro-pharmacology, and ASD as opposed to the conventional fixation on the far less complex and undemanding symptoms, behavioral characteristics, and therapy. Their conspicuous nescient nature will become readily apparent.
Philosophy and neuroscience (specializing in autism/ASD) would pretty fucking cool to double major in, especially from UC Berkeley. I'm currently lazy and lethargic as fuck with a vast array of severe ailments and serious issues, so of course I wouldn't be able to handle the course load. Well, two years until that's even really something to decide. Ah, fuck it, a formal education in neuroscience wouldn't be the same. The education system is already inefficient enough to begin with, but with neuroscience my sole interest is in autism. Of course there's a vast amount related to this, insights that could be had, potentially from other disorders, but even then it could be learned independently. For example, the deficit in sensory gating in schizophrenia and how it may relate to that found in autism, the various disproportionately high comorbidities etc. As to neuroscience and consciousness, I believe they're asking the wrong questions. Not that the findings won't be valuable, particularly for computer science, automation and machine learning, and AI specifically, that isn't what I refer to. I simply mean I believe the data is very unlikely to be of value to me, to philosophy.
Post last edited by Malice at 2017-07-18T20:12:09.442805+00:00 -
2017-07-18 at 7:51 PM UTC
Originally posted by Malice The resurgence of negative utilitarianism. I love it, I'm genuinely enamored with anti-natalism and how it can further be developed for the involuntary (hardy har har) extermination of the human race, of all life. I can even tie in possible solutions to the problems of identity and consciousness, which will require enormous work, based on my interpretation of the original teachings of Buddhism, the justification for the concept of no-self, that the concepts of identity and consciousness are untenable, "illusory", and ultimately there is no fundamental difference between this state and death. No, that isn't quite it. It's excruciatingly difficult to explain, unsurprisingly, as these may be the most difficult problems in philosophy and neuroscience, my two principle interests. Even without my argument on the nature of what we perceive to identity and consciousness, the argument for the end of all life in existence, its desirability, is still sound.
That after all this time there could still be room to seriously posit something as extreme as this, following in the lineage of such great men as Buddha, Schopenhauer, and Benatar, attempting to unify and complete their work. What a wonderful opportunity for a person passionate about entering the field of philosophy.
Lanny, what's your opinion on negative utilitarianism?
Also, I forgot to mention this. I was searching for an old post of mine and came across something you wrote two years ago, which brought it to mind:
Amazingly, I'm actually a complete novice in philosophy. Prior to this I had the same common misconceptions about it having no practical value, being unable to find answers/solutions, ultimately leading nowhere. That and the view that ultimately everything was unknowable/uncertain.
I distinctly recall that I developed an interest in existentialism at some point during the 3 year period of suicidal depression. The reason was quite cliche, a desperate final attempt to find a compelling reason to live. No answer I came across, nothing I had ever read, in fiction or philosophy, felt satisfying, ultimately everything posited appeared to be fundamentally flawed and untenable.
I don't think I began taking philosophy somewhat seriously until sometime this year, really within the last 4 months or so. The reason I may be to grasp it so quickly is due to my abnormal/atypical neurology and mind along with the enormous widespread knowledge base I'm able to utilize to form connections and derivatives. I'll spare the details.
Certainly I'm not deluded enough to believe I'm remarkable or even necessarily show promise at this point, or am even knowledgeable. Fortunately I have that legendary aspie obsession to kick into high gear, particularly once studies are focused on it. Just imagine if I became as monomaniacle about philosophy as I have about autism and its neurology, which I accomplished solely as an amateur interest, with no formal education. It is astounding how underinformed, uninformed, and misinformed even the majority of ASD specialists are. Simply attempt an erudite conversation on neuroscience, neuro-pharmacology, and ASD as opposed to the conventional fixation on the far less complex and undemanding symptoms, behavioral characteristics, and therapy. Their conspicuous nescient nature will become readily apparent.
Philosophy and neuroscience (specializing in autism/ASD) would pretty fucking cool to double major in, especially from UC Berkeley. I'm currently lazy and lethargic as fuck with a vast array of severe ailments and serious issues, so of course I wouldn't be able to handle the course load. Well, two years until that's even really something to decide. Ah, fuck it, a formal education in neuroscience wouldn't be the same. The education system is already inefficient enough to begin with, but with neuroscience my sole interest is in autism. Of course there's a vast amount related to this, insights that could be had, potentially from other disorders, but even then it could be learned independently. For example, the deficit in sensory gating in schizophrenia and how it may relate to that found in autism, the various disproportionately high comorbidities etc. As to neuroscience and consciousness, I believe they're asking the wrong questions. Not that the findings won't be valuable, particularly for computer science, automation and machine learning, and AI specifically, that isn't what I refer to. I simply mean I believe the data is very unlikely to be of value to me, to philosophy.
didnt read -
2017-07-18 at 7:51 PM UTCMalice, what are your thoughts on Absurdism?
