/philosophy/ - Philosophy

San Fransisco Failed, Germany Failed, Iceland Failed, there have been countless attempts to ban infant male circumcision that have failed despite having a majority support in the area? Areas where religious minorities are at an all time low, circumcision rates are essentially non-existent. Yet non-medically justified, routine genital mutilation (religious or not) continues to occur despite the gender counter part being forbidden by law.

What message does it send where males are violated at birth, while females have their bodies protected by law? Iceland hospitals refused to conduct infant circumcision and had signed agreements among the hospitals across the country to refuse such services as medically unjustified. As a result a vote to illegalize the practice was initiated which resulted in international uproar.

It's an extremely simple topic that people have an illogical habit of complicating. The right to inflict bodily injury on another persons body without their consent. Religiously motivated or not. I cant religiously mutilate animals. It's considered animal abuse.

The main contention I have, is to put the practice into perspective to see the true tragedy and the reason why it's not complicated to see why it should be illegal. To turn the infant, into a grown adult, and keep the situation identical.

You are 25 years old. Your parents have decided to take you against your will to the doctors, where people over power you, forcefully strap you onto an operating table, strap your legs and arms down so you can't move, and without anesthesia, take a knife to your genitals, cutting the most private part of your body as you scream in pain. This is something you'd expect in a scene from the Saw movie franchise. Not something we would callously turn a blind eye happening to infants.

So what are you thoughts on why so many countries have failed their own children to protect them from genital mutilation.

https://wwPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

Why do we lie? It’s the source to every other evil on our planet.

Naturally, we wouldn’t lie. When we have everything we need, when we get everything we want, we don’t have to lie. We wouldn’t have to betray.

Is the pressure on every single one of us way to large? Can’t we handle our existence, whitout lying? Are we just coping the behavior of our fellow humans? Are we hidden in a negative spyrale, because the best liers have the best chances for might and power?

Isn’t this spreading just like cancer? Is our planet like the first cancer cell in a human body? When’s the moment you differ? Now, it’s a healthy cell, fighting the cancer whitin. Now it’s a comlete cancer cell, ready to infiltrate other cells, ready to spread.

We are currently planning to invade our neighbor cell, Mars.

On the other side. How easy would it be, to heal this cancer. When we just delete the negative factor.

We can just start to erfüllen the needs of the next smaler cells. For the human body, that would be some proteins i think, for our world it is a little more complicated.

The next smaller would be the continents, the nations, the regions, the cities and villages, the families and then the humans, you and me.

That’s just the natural order, a pattern i find everywhere.

If a cell is sick, satisfy it’s needs.

If our planet is sick, satisfy every humans needs.

To eleminate all the corruption, all the wars, all the deaths, all the thefts, wheter it’s nations stealing from other nations, or people stealing from other people, or people stealing from everyone.

All we have to do, is fulfill our needs and be happy.

But everyone has to know and do this.

Everyone has to see the vision.

Anyone has to know, where he wants to go.

Some of us have to lead the way.

Where We Go One We Go All. Let's start pointing at directions.

Q - positron

That's what humanity's best at.

There were so many informations, produced by human minds, from the moment we invented the word 'idea' til now.

Every generation learnt their forefathers facts, connected them, found similarities and compressed the information into the next larger piece of the puzzle called nature.

Our generation is gonna create an explosion of knowledge. We got the internet.

Try it for yourself.

Jordan Peterson:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8e_dvbXoCQ

1000 books of our intellectuel ancestors, compressed to 5h from one of the smartest guys around.

Your turn's next. Try to compress this information into a 1 minute video.

Where We Go One We Wonnna Know

What's a lifespan?

It's a mosquitos fart compared to the evolution of our lifestyle.

Let's produce a show. About a Familly.

Scenario:

The builder of the pyramides extinct after a flood, caused by the end of the iceage

Some 'pharaos' survived in foreign countries, building monuments all over the world.

I want a show about their descendants, from then till now. After each episode, the next generation gets into the lead position.

A show through history, from the perspective of one single family.

How would this change the perspective of our own lifetime? How much could we learn, when we continue, start to write the story of our own future?

When we get in complete control of this monster called time.

Positive suggestion.

If you want to gain perspective, set it into relation.

Another story idea.

A man makes a plan to fly to the stars.

For him and his next 28 Generations.

He got the idea. Generation 3 & 4 make the money.

G 5 - 10 engineer the rockets, create the science.

Generation 12 lifts off, 248 People leave our planet.

The next 13 Generation live their lives in space, on an eternal travel.

At Generation 25 another human spaceship passes by, more advanced and much faster.

They knew about our guys and they have presents, new and better technology from far back home.

Generation 26 arrives at the new planet, faster than expected.

Generation 27 & 28 Set their Foundation for their new civilisation.

This film is the work of the head of the first generation, to visualize his vision. To inform & motivate every single descendant from him to work for this shared vision.

https://youtu.be/fabjooTef3I

What happens, when we educate a group of people to organize themself the old ways. All woman organazing together, the man fix problem and find solutions.

We could start experimantal companies, run that way.

Where We Go One We Go In Love.

The world has been divides, social progress has bin prohibited for the last 200 Years.

Now the times are changing.

So, what's next?

Liberalism, Capitalism, Nationalism, Communism, Democracy..

All this Ideas are so old. I want something new. Humanity learned so much over the last century. I'd like to use this knowledge. We invented so many devices, some of them are smarter than we are.

Let us use that shit.

So, what's next?

Let us gather ideas.

All of us. Let us compare and combine our ideas. Let us try them. Let us create a list of thousands of ways for humans to live together, locally, sustainable and peacefully.

And if you want to, you can support a specific idea, and when there are enough supporters, you can start to live in this society.

imo, humanities last mistake has been the limitation of possibilities.

There can only be good, or evil.

Strong or weak.

It's the only way.

Left or right?

This is not how evolution works.

Nature is always trying to create as many alternatives as possible.

We need diversity.

We have to create as many different possibilities as we can.

Time is gonna destroy a majority of them.

That's called evolution.

That's just the most efficient way to prepare for the unpreparable.

Where we go one, our futurest children will live.

Q - positron

>One of the best Atheist Philosophers

>Recognizes Man's need for Self-esteem

>Holds reality to be an absolute.

>No mystified metaphysics and epistemology.

There seems to be something far deeper to Rand than her political philosophy. It's a shame that people don't know about it more.

https://youtu.be/h7BnyceWE5w

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e28DrQzlteI

I think he makes more sense than any of the Alt-Right lunatics that call themselves skeptics.

Skeptics community in 2008: Religion is bad

Skeptics community in 2018: On second thought religion is alright.

I like seeing him destroy Sargon of Akkad and Armored Skeptic.

hi

need your help in giving arguments to support the idea that our human consciousness is somehow different from a toilet flush system. The discussion started on

https://alethe.me/alice_attarado/what%20is%20your%20consciousness%3F/0/1/ some time ago but somehow died out apparantly because it's quite evident that there is no qualitative difference.

If you know any please let me know on this threa or on alethe.

One must have heritage within the land that they live upon them in order to sensitively register its aesthetic properties.

In order to purge the depths of one's ethereal aesthetic inventory they must be receptive to the nature of their land. It is a matter of non-biological epigenetic evolution.

No nigger could fathom the holistic conceptual and physical beauty of the North-western European continent and thus could not acquire the sacred knowledge of the land's logic. Tolerance is for one to be able to communicate with another individual on ostensive matters, this is what a racially-mixed communion is. Yet, for one to truly, sensually communicate to progress knowledge and form a chain of ideas they must be connected to the land they are poised within. It is the momentum of productive communion.

It is not a matter of colour, it is a matter of heritage, yet I will not argue that there is a reverent utility in differentiation as the polarised colour of a nigger in relation to a European Man can guide one to garner conclusions in a similar function to how one may conclude that a piece of fruit is rotten from its colour. Love your home and raise your lands.

FUCK NATIONAL GOVERNMENT, AND LET RISE SEGREGATED, ANARCHISTICALLY-FOUNDED ARISTOCRACIES.

How the hell are all of these the same person?

If people have a problem with conditionals with false antecedents and with true consequents always being true, why not just change it according to what is found to be more intuitive? Regarding equivalence with some disjunctions, every explanation I hear seems to make sense prima facie, but I think ultimately they make sense merely because it makes the whole system simple and easy to work with. For instance, (p->q)->(~pVq) is not as intuitively necessarily true as maybe (pVq)->(~p->q). Simply changing how implications behave reflects that some of these disjunctions, while equivalent with the material implication, would indeed cease to be equivalent. So again, why do we stick with the material implication? Is it because in it, they're equivalent to disjunctions and are therefore translatable by something like DeMorgan's Laws and provide for tidy simplifications?

If the question "Why is there something rather than nothing?" and the answer "There is no reason," does this answer fulfill the fullest potential of what an answer is, or does it lack any discernible thing to be such an answer other than perhaps not being satisfying to some? Why or why not?

I'm not interested in brainlet critiques of the positing of the question itself, rather critiques of this answer or other possible answers

AKA philosophical dumping ground and inquiries.

Starting off: Can someone repost the three images in the second post of the sticky?

Why Is every goddamn female philosopher a fucking feminist?