If you're after a serious answer, Territorians, or 'from the Territory'.

No complaints here

too complicated

stick to mindless hedonism

This thread needs more epicureanism.

Atavism

Basically, its progress and evolution to the point it reverts to a form of primitivism, in extension to this is - in the laws of natural selection, it happens when recessive types thrive

Narcissus

"That's the thing about Narcissus, it's not that he's so fing in love with himself, because he isn't at all, he fing hates himself. It's that without that reflection looking back at him... he doesn't exist. "

Social Darwinism is not so much an "extension" of Darwinism as it is a misapplication of it.

Darwinism, or natural selection via survival of the fittest is merely a description of HOW species evolve to survive in their environment.

Social Darwinism or Eugenics adds in an ETHICAL or MORAL element to how selection applies.

Just because natural selection occurs in nature, does not mean it is good or desirable.

The same process of evolution that produced homo sapiens also produced every other living thing - viruses, lions, birds, trees etc.

Natural selection has no relevance when society exists in a state of surplus, which we are in.

What I am saying is that social Darwinism tries to give a moral/ethical authority to something which is merely a biological and environmental process.

It makes no sense. You can't blame Charles Darwin for the creation of eugenics, as it is not a natural extension of his theory.

Edited by AzzaMarch: 23/7/2015 05:59:18 PM

[youtube]JXWBuoYc8SI[/youtube]

The Harry Potter movies from a different perspective :lol:

Check out the first page :lol:

Embarrassing.

Deep.

I wonder what people from Darwin, Northern Territory call themselves?

Darwinian?
Social Darwinists? :-k

"Everyone's always wondering what happens to us when we die?

ALOT happens after we die- just none of those things that happen will involve YOU

There'll be a super bowl every year..."

- Louis Ck

Will we ever be able to demarcate science from pseudoscience?

Edited by "9GABmeme420": 1/6/2015 08:18:05 AM

Theodore Dalrymple

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/futuretense/the-digital-photograph-message-and-memory/6019424

^ This is an interesting take on the era of digital photography and social media on the concept of presentism, perfectionist narcissism and existentialism inside all this technology

It's often the female in my family - my mother instigated divorce proceedings with my father. Same with both my paternal and maternal grandparents' first marriages.

"I don't have the stats for Australia"

I also said "instigators", which doesn't necessarily exclude joint application.

If I use the anecdotal examples in my own family, the divorces were jointly filed despite being instigated by the female.

I'd check your stats, in Australia according to the ABS joint divorce applicants is highest at 39.7% followed by female and closely followed by male

Granted the gap was significant a decade or so ago

I still have some moments even though it is mostly amicable; my partner's situation is totally like a movie though and I wish she wasn't going through it.

I think the issue isn't with portrayal but that the method of portrayal is determined by the lowest common denominator. Also it's very hard to visually portray an outwards moving explosion from a central viewing point.

All this was raised in my philosophy lecture today, very fascinating and painful to the cranium.

I'm finding a lot of theistic arguments suffer not from a psychological disorder as many atheists/materialists point out, but rather a social disorder. How we understand and craft language on complex metaphysical issues such as the origin of consciousness and the universe need to evolve and match what science is finding in the natural world.

The Big Bang for example is often viewed in the mind from the outside looking in, as some sort of vast cosmic explosion that extends violently outwards. This is false as, a) there is no outside to view it from so you immediately view it incorrectly b) it wasn't an explosion c) I doubt there was any light as no stars were near their formation d) it hasn't stopped, it continues with ever more expansion due to dark matter/energy

It is difficult for the layman to understand because it is extremely difficult, perhaps impossible, to explain as clearly and easily as 'God did it'

Facts are absolute.

The Truth is a matter of perspective, subjective to data observed.

Is the truth relative or absolute?

If it's relative then saying it as that would imply it to be absolute

If it's absolute then it would only be understood from a relative standpoint

Well put. It's certainly not necessary, but functional families certainly bare fruit in a functional society.

I think it's really a case of "be alert, not alarmed". Marriage in our society is completely unnecessary, but it's still kinda nice when you find the right partner.

My old man has made a killing in his life time, but gives most of it away. Absolutely amazing man when it comes to things like that. He's set of life but doesn't let excess money control him at all.

Both fantastic posts. Notor's post scared the shit out of me, to be honest.

A mate of mine is in Brazil right now, and I was lamenting the other day that I wasn't there.

He replied "At least you know who your kids are"

Anthropomorphism

Anthropomorphism, or personification, is attribution of human form or other characteristics to anything other than a human being. Examples include depicting deities with human form and ascribing human emotions or motives to forces of nature, such as hurricanes or earthquakes - from afromanpedia.org

All gods and spiritual entities are personifications which humanity invents within the natural world so as to make it more understandable and comfortable to reside in, especially with the the biological fact of death.

---

I tested this and other theories out when I did shrooms last week. Interesting to note the molecular similarities between psilocybin and DMT, which I think is absolutely fascinating. What really struck me was that my mind itself was also experiencing the same effects as my senses were, which has never happened before as I would usually experience the trip via my senses and process it with my mind which would be relatively normal during the event. The whole time was very dreamlike and was devoid of any ulterior meaning apart from having fun and creating something (2deep4me). My early conclusion is that personification is a big human psychological trait, and has a relative truth to it much like language, as it is an invention to understand, a tool made by a tool-making species to assist in its survival.

The best thought I had was that the mind is a projection of the outside world, all self archetypes are based off our Sun, and that the best way to avoid trembling and suffering in the mind is to constantly keep moving and remain ecstatic. The universe, it seems, only exists because it is ecstatic (obviously)

---

As for solipsism, it is complete bullshit. I would love to see a room full of solipsists arguing about which one of them is really there.

Solipsism

Its an expansion of the human philosophy of Epistemology-> "How you know what you know" without knowing what someone else knows what they know- thus in turn it means you know nothing

But just watching the shots of those children crying in the stands at the World Cup Semi Final had me thinking people from South America would see an event like the world cup to be the most hedonistic experience (hedonism means - pleasure is good) in life.
Even though life is more random, and how seldom is everything about something

But in terms of making a psycho-philosophical analysis to children crying in the stands - in terms of their epistemology - it pinpoints the moment a child's innocence has died; where resentment begins to be harboured; the cynicism of adulthood commences.

All of which comes despite the fact everything that was going on in the middle of the pitch between the two football teams had nothing to do with them

Hmm... I wont be going to a holiday to Brazil anytime soon :-K