Freedom and Principles are more important than anything

[guru1000]

Do you not see how this can be seen as being disingenius? You could walk straight from a charged debate on abortion, but then into a discussion with say, a boss, and remain silent, for social gain.

It's called being smart, and not living a (life-sentence) machination of social "virtue."

You are not who you think you are. You are simply an amalgamation of your DNA proclivities and social conditioning. Virtues are manmade constructs. Neither right nor wrong exists; only perceptions.

When you play, you play to win, for you and for everyone else.

What you think you won by your "virtue" is simply a pyrrhic victory.

 

[Fruitbat]

I actually have a memory longer than a few weeks. I remember the slamming of the unemployed - i was working for a company that dealt with the aftereffects. I remember how everyone was all for it, and how it was put accross TV as "poverty porn".

Then, in the last election, when it comes time to focus on in work benefits, people changing their tune fast. It was a big reason that the Conservatives lost their majority in an election that they were expected to smash.

People are fvcking hypocrites. Your "morals" are there to be taken advantage of.

Go with option two for the now: be on the fiddle yourself. Same as what others are telling you imo. When playing with a devil, become one.

Wait until Labour get in again. Corbyn, Abbott, and Thornberry. It'll be the worst appointment to public office since Calligula named his horse consul. And all based on the worst parts of human nature.

It won't happen. 51% voted leave and the sole reason May lost is because she thought she would win with a massive majority so she took a few freebies, by stabbing her core support in the back.

If Corbyn wins, I am leaving. Let socialism run its course.

 

[Fruitbat]

It's called being smart, and not living a (life-sentence) machination of social "virtue."

You are not who you think you are. You are simply an amalgamation of your DNA proclivities and social conditioning. Virtues are manmade constructs. Neither right nor wrong exists; only perceptions.

When you play, you play to win, for you and for everyone else.

What you think you won by your "virtue" is simply a pyrrhic victory.

That's relativism, and a convenient way to avoid any judgement on anything. Right or wrong has only even existed in a human mind, I agree. However, the sum totality of all existence is in a human mind, thus the value you put on it is as real as the milky way or a blade of grass.

I have come full circle with objective reality to the same place I started. Which is the value we place on things is completely valid and real, because the only place anything has existed is in a human mind. Nothing has ever been experienced beyond that.

The values of justice, democracy, ethics and morality will live long after the ego driven social climbers have rotten into dust. We remember Socrates, but we don't know much about the movers and shakers of Athens of that era. They forfeited that, but they lived an easy life, in the soft play area of smiles and dinner parties.

Thus, your values are infinitely more important than lowly things like social image. Higher values are more important.

 

[guru1000]

Thus, your values are infinitely more important than lowly things like social image. Higher values are more important.

Show me evidence that these "values" are higher. Otherwise, it's simply abstract ... a perception. And I choose--as opposed to unconsciously choosing incited by social/biblical indoctrination--to perceive "values" in a manner which benefits me (and others).

 

[Fruitbat]

You're unable to play the social game that has been part of civilization since the dawn of time.

And you spin this weakness into some kind of moral strength, and call yourself an outcast, as if you are some kind of moral, heroic martyr.

Humans are not angels.

Humans are not vulcans.

Humans are talking monkeys that live within a social environment and use every trick in the book to climb up the social ladder.

Might makes right, and it always will.

This is demonstrated socially by who can play the social game most effectively.

Play the game well and get laid and paid like a rockstar.

Get in the game or get on the sidelines.

Don't pretend to be morally superior because you don't know how to play.

Ok, there is some truth in that but I take objection to "not knowing how to play".

I think you're reading into things a bit too much, I get laid and paid to an extent I am happy with. I;m also a professional salesman so I am literally paid for my ability to influence people. Not windows either, my friend, a pretty high end type of sales person with a £50M target! I deal with business owners and large corporations, these are my peers, you aren't talking to some lone unemployed person, thank you!

 

[Fruitbat]

Show me evidence that these "values" are higher. Otherwise, it's simply abstract ... a perception. And I choose--as opposed to unconsciously choosing incited by social/biblical indoctrination--to perceive "values" in a manner which benefits me (and others).

So, raping people are we? They're just abstract values....it benefits you potentially.

Well past the place you are, friend. Read some Nietzsche.

If you've chosen your morality to be a totally self centred one, that says a lot about you. I don't quite think you've grasped what you're saying.

 

[Fruitbat]

This fvcking forum at times! 80% good lads discussing, 20% egos running amok! Fvcks sake, but it always pulls me in

 

[guru1000]

So, raping people are we? They're just abstract values....it benefits you potentially.

Well past the place you are, friend. Read some Nietzsche.

Raping is the ostensible act of stripping from another and gaining for thyself solely. Or so it would appear. However, what if said rape was a antecedent step needed to incite growth in the victim that could not otherwise be incited without such an act. Would such a rape then be a blessing or tragedy?

Can your mind supersede the socially-indoctrinated pathos of this last paragraph and respond logically.

 

[Fruitbat]

Raping is the ostensible act of stripping from another and gaining for thyself solely. Or so it would appear. However, what if said rape was a antecedent step needed to incite growth in the victim that could not otherwise be incited without such an act. Would such a rape then be a blessing or tragedy?

Can your mind supersede the socially-indoctrinated pathos of this last paragraph and respond logically.

This sounds like V for Vendetta.

There is a reason that society values rape as purely an act of barbarism. It's the aggregate of human opinion and experience that rape generally is NOT a precursor to growth and most commonly leads to suffering on the part of the victim. What if? What if it led to growth? If my auntie had b0ll0x, she'd be my uncle.

I understand you like to question everything and assume anyone who doesn't act in a value-less state of nihilism is purely repeating their social programming. In many ways this happens and it's right to question it. However, I think it's foolish to apply this carte blanche to everythng. Some consensus exists. It's a logical fallcy to suggest that because some socially programmed, automatic thinking is irrational, to throw the baby out with the bathwater and claim all ethics and values are irrational and not thought through, which seems to be your track here.

Nevertheless, good debate.

 

[guru1000]

It begins with the humility (yes, Guru1000 wrote humility) to accept that we in our corporeal form know little. Even today, we theorize about our existence and purpose. We contrived theories such as evolution and conflicting religions over thousands over years, but yet still cannot factually explain from where we arose.

Now you want to designate the evolution of social values as truth? Make sense?

I’m not a Neitzsche reader nor do I subscribe to any particular philosophy except this: There is no bad that can fall upon me. It’s simple yet deep.

Ever play chess? The skill of a chess player is determined by the depth of moves ahead he or she can think. A rookie can only see one move ahead, whereas a grandmaster can see 10 or more moves ahead. When a grandmaster makes a move, most players cannot understand the logic of the move, as they are unable to see the depth of possibilities that occur 10+ moves ahead in the future with the one move the grandmaster makes now.

Same applies in life. The seeds that you plant or strippings (e.g. rape) that occur allow us to see the consequences right now, but we lack the vision to see how these acts develop over say 10-20 years (or subsequent lifetimes).

In short, our perspectives are myopic. Ironically, my greatest experiences in life were those that society would deem most tragic. Here 10-15 years later, I just begin to understand that these “tragedies” were indeed blessings.

I do believe in the intelligent design of the universe and thus intelligence that exists outside the corporeality. Further, my own experience demonstrates that all that has happened in my life were also designed by intelligence, and all I had to do is connect the dots retroactively to clearly understand the why now.

It follows, if there is transcendental intelligence outside the corporeality which created all the beauty that you see, what logic would there be for that same intelligence which already knows what you will choose (based on your genetics and conditioning) to have created you to hurt yourself or others?

We have the incorrect understanding of pain. Pain is growth, not retraction for those who know how to navigate it’s latent purpose and transcend. The simplest example is when your weight-train, you tear your muscle and create pain to create a stronger, more versatile muscle subsequent.

Life’s pains are the evolving of your spiritual and mental muscles.

Carry on.

 

[Macaframalama]

To be fair there is some truth in that for sure.

I have a friend in this clique and he just keeps his mouth shut.He's too clever to buy in, but he just sighs and changes the subject.

I've always been a fighter and I quite like a ruck.

Difference is, I can tolerate another view, and still like someone. I make it banter. Lefties/SJW/Progressives seem to genuinely think you've evil. I'd never ostracise someone for it.

Perhaps this is why they are winning. Or at least have been for a long time.

I can't stand the puke and their ilk. It doesn't even bother me to make it be known, as I don't care if I'm liked by them or not. I have to respect someone to care about their opinion of me. And they are winning, because they are rewarded for it (redistribution of wealth).

 

[Macaframalama]

Even today, we theorize about our existence and purpose.

Do you think freedom and slavery are close?

 

[Red Legg]

Remember from the 48 Laws of Power...

Law 38: Think as you like but behave like others.

I disagree that this is spineless. I don't think stating views that rock the boat serves your interests. Rather it creates discomfort in the group and creates animosity toward you.

How these people navigate their lives doesn't materially effect you unless you get above the radar screen with some comment other people find controversial. Never forget...the way you choose to interact with others WILL influence the way others interact with you. Therefore you can exert a great deal of control over the perceptions of others by having awareness on the front end.

That doesn't mean you have to state agreement with every opinion these people have. It's about social calibration. I for example am conservative in my political leanings. I have some friends who are quite liberal. Some I can have political discourse and conversation with despite our vastly different views...some cannot tolerate dissention from their own political opinion. I do not talk politics with those who cannot handle dissention. There's no point in it, it riles people up & there are 10,000 other things to chat about. It's my job to know who's who and read social situations on the fly.

Spoken like a true woman......Men speak their minds and damn the consequences lady.With attitudes like yours or law # 38 the USA never would have stood up and beat the hell out of the red coats (British) in 1776. Rock the boat so hard it sinks...to hell with the so-called "laws of power"

 

[guru1000]

Do you think freedom and slavery are close?

You are born to certain parents, not your choice;

You born with certain genetic proclivities, not your choice;

You are born and raised into certain social indoctrination and conditioning (education, media, religion, family), not your choice;

You are surrounded by certain people outside of your family whom you spend time with due to your genetic proclivities, social conditioning, and by chance, not your choice (for the most part);

You are born with the will to receive, whereas your choices mostly comprise that which create the most pleasure (whether long- or short-term) and least pain among the options/surroundings mentioned above, not truly a choice.

How much of your free will is truly free?

 

[Fruitbat]

You are born to certain parents, not your choice;

You born with certain genetic proclivities, not your choice;

You are born and raised into certain social indoctrination and conditioning (education, media, religion, family), not your choice;

You are surrounded by certain people outside of your family whom you spend time with due to your genetic proclivities, social conditioning, and by chance, not your choice (for the most part);

You are born with the will to receive, whereas your choices mostly comprise that which create the most pleasure (whether long- or short-term) and least pain among the options/surroundings mentioned above, not truly a choice.

How much of your free will is truly free?

You chose to exist. What you think is "you" is an experience about 2 inches behind your eyes, with a projector screen playing. If that is "You", try to describe what you are without also describing the entire world you work in. Can you describe an ant walking, without referencing the floor? The medium of air? Different points on a map? Up and down, left and right?

Your own perception of self is an illusion, but one not need to view this as slavery to ones surrounding, as you yourself are just as responsible as those surroundings!

You are not stuck in traffic, you are traffic!

You evolved over millennia to exist today.

You are part of a string of complex matter which originally self-animated from other matter (as far as we can deduce, the scientific method has less evidence for a designed universe)

You aren't a passenger mate. You're not "poor little me" who was thrust into this world.

Does the apple on the tree feel a captor of it's parent? Was it forced to grow? Did it grow itself?

You are an agent of this universe and you were forced on others as much as they were forced upon you.

Were you indoctrinated or did you observe the collective intellectual consensus and social values from repeated trial and error?

I feel you are viewing your own existence as a burden.

 

[guru1000]

You chose to exist. What you think is "you" is an experience about 2 inches behind your eyes, with a projector screen playing. If that is "You", try to describe what you are without also describing the entire world you work in. Can you describe an ant walking, without referencing the floor? The medium of air? Different points on a map? Up and down, left and right?

Your own perception of self is an illusion, but one not need to view this as slavery to ones surrounding, as you yourself are just as responsible as those surroundings!

You are not stuck in traffic, you are traffic!

You evolved over millennia to exist today.

You are part of a string of complex matter which originally self-animated from other matter (as far as we can deduce, the scientific method has less evidence for a designed universe)

You aren't a passenger mate. You're not "poor little me" who was thrust into this world.

Does the apple on the tree feel a captor of it's parent? Was it forced to grow? Did it grow itself?

You are an agent of this universe and you were forced on others as much as they were forced upon you.

Were you indoctrinated or did you observe the collective intellectual consensus and social values from repeated trial and error?

I feel you are viewing your own existence as a burden.

Haha. You seem to argue that free will is entirely free yet create the OP suggesting that you direct yourself by principles—which are man-made social constructs that you were indoctrinated with and thus by virtue of your operating by others’ principles, you are not operating by your own volition but rather your programming.

I, conversely, suggested that you forego your (indoctrination of) principles and operate by your own volition by taking actions that benefit you (and others) irrespective of whether they are principled or not.

The only free will one exercises is that which goes against one’s indoctrination, social values, genetic proclivities, and surroundings.

Here I am exercising free will and here you are not. Yet you argue for free will. The irony!

 

[Fruitbat]

Haha. You seem to argue that free will is entirely free yet create the OP suggesting that you direct yourself by principles—which are man-made social constructs that you were indoctrinated with and thus by virtue of your operating by others’ principles, you are not operating by your own volition but rather your programming.

I, conversely, suggested that you forego your (indoctrination of) principles and operate by your own volition by taking actions that benefit you (and others) irrespective of whether they are principled or not.

The only free will one exercises is that which goes against one’s indoctrination, social values, genetic proclivities, and surroundings.

Here I am exercising free will and here you are not. Yet you argue for free will. The irony!

Acting with social values can be as much an exercise of free will as not. In stating "The only free will is that which goes against ones indoctrination" you are as much a slave to them as the fundamentalist Christian is to his, because the revolt to those values is still determining your choice in action.

If you're saying one can only truly exercise free will in opposition to social conditioning, you first have to define that, and act accordingly.

If we take your example, only doing things which benefit you, or others, you already have a principle. How can that be "unprincipled or not"? You've already made a premise and a principle!

I trust you've enjoyed hearing another viewpoint and perhaps we should cut it here as I feel it's becoming more a game of one-upmanship than a serious discussion.

 

[guru1000]

Acting with social values can be as much an exercise of free will as not. In stating "The only free will is that which goes against ones indoctrination" you are as much a slave to them as the fundamentalist Christian is to his, because the revolt to those values is still determining your choice in action.

If you're saying one can only truly exercise free will in opposition to social conditioning, you first have to define that, and act accordingly.

If we take your example, only doing things which benefit you, or others, you already have a principle. How can that be "unprincipled or not"? You've already made a premise and a principle!

I trust you've enjoyed hearing another viewpoint and perhaps we should cut it here as I feel it's becoming more a game of one-upmanship than a serious discussion.

The intent matters, not the action.

If you are acting with the intent that it is the “right” thing to do as defined by what society defines as “right,” then you are acting in accordance with your programming.

If, however, you are acting with the intent to fulfill your volition without conscious regard as to what society defines as “right,” then you are acting by your own volition, irrespective of whether that act is socially right or wrong.

This argument can run deep: For example, it could be argued that one’s intent of acting within one’s own volition irrespective of social values is unconsciously derived with the originating unconscious intent programmed or influenced by social constructs.

However, in the sphere of conscious behaviors, if you are consciously directing an intent based on virtuosity which evolved by the hands of social constructs, then it is clear your will is contrived (though not for all consciously), certainly not of one of unequivocal originality.

 

[BeExcellent]

Spoken like a true woman......Men speak their minds and damn the consequences lady.With attitudes like yours or law # 38 the USA never would have stood up and beat the hell out of the red coats (British) in 1776. Rock the boat so hard it sinks...to hell with the so-called "laws of power"

Oh . Obviously you aren't familiar with the book nor are you reading the context of the OP.

Are you seriously this dense?

Sometimes law #15 "Crush your enemy totally" is correct...sometimes law #23 "Concentrate your forces" is correct...sometimes law #28 "Enter action with boldness", etc...

There are many tactics and strategies at one's disposal for any given scenario in life...

The successful in life; the victorious in life; they know which tactic and strategy is best in a given situation.

Law 38 is the correct tactic in OPs situation.

 

[Black Widow Void]

Fruitbat, those that claim you lack "social game" (with little to no other insight to offer) may lack the comprehension of your viewpoint (this isn't a jab to anyone btw).

Also being in sales, I take it that we may be alike here. I can sell the H3ll out of a product I believe in, but fail with something I do not. The same goes for clients. If someone cant afford or benefit, I can't (won't) sell. If I know there's a benefit to someone, I'm the best in my field.

At the end of the day, we go to sleep with our principles (and some go to sleep with a lack of). This isn't a judgment call, it's just a fact.

Me? I really don't like myself very much when I engage in time/conversation with women that are uninteresting or stereotypical "rural" for the sake of bedding. Like nearly everyone (if not all) here, I've done it, but it sure feels like a compromise to my core . Sure, it has "benefit" but it's at a cost to my self-worth. In other words, I'm a slave to my c*ck.

When it comes to peers, some play the game (and are quite experienced) . While some may be naturals, most get better by experience. I'd conclude that they practice more often due to being a slave to others. In other words, being a living hostage to the very people they oppose. This is usually rationalized by their desire for what the other has to offer (material gain, social status etc...) . The reality is that their agenda based 'goal' has more value to them than their inner personal worth.

My mind was opened because I listened to others. Fortunately, these people didn't conform. The best you can offer to a friend is your true self. I agree with a post-person above that stated that you have to know your audience and practice tact or else the repercussion could leave you getting ostracized. You can practice that art and maintain your self-worth, while opening the minds of others (which will not be all, but a few) .