211–220 of 625 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a strange mode of persuasion, making arguments about how we should frame psychological dysfunction that quote a man who pooped into a hole in the corner of a shack while in hiding after trying to down a passenger jet.
That is the definition of an ”ad hominem” argument.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tFgF1JPNR5E&t=9m35s Tom Cruise was right then.
Tom Cruise is a leading member in the fascist cult Church of Scientology, who is on record saying they can bring back people from the dead and levitate.
EDIT: I'm rate limited so I can't reply to the child comments:
I think a majority of Buddhists believe that Buddhas and bodhisattvas have special powers. It is in a majority of the traditional scriptures, from both Mahayana and before. I don't think the authoritarian nature of scientology changes the situation. Scientologists were being mocked for believing in such things, but that is not far from the beliefs of most Buddhists which people will happily listen to.
I mean, you will likely even listen to His Holiness the Dalai Lama, who is literally a prophesied reincarnation of the bodhisattva Avalokiteshvara (Guanyin in Chinese, Kannon in Japanese)
My point isn't that people can be right about some things and wrong about others, it's that people mock their disliked religious figures on one basis, but their mocking also applies just as much to their favourite religious figures, however they don't realise it because they are usually ignorant to many aspects of it. Everyone loves Buddhism, but go and criticise other religions for reasons that apply just as much to Buddhism, they are just ignorant that it also applies to Buddhism.
I am a devout Buddhist, and believe in these traditional things, such as Buddhas flying or having their own Buddha lands or faith in my rebirth in a western Pure Land. I emphasise it because you probably don't know of these things
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How would you "medically disprove" the notion that some people are unhappy because the circumstances of their lives are bad rather than biological defects?
Unhappy is dramatically, completely different to depression. I've been both and they don't even feel that similar.
Anecdata, but I was often depressed for most of my adjust life. Around 5-6 years ago (age 33 at the time), I started taking 20mg Citalopram. I have experienced almost no depression since I started taking this medication, I'm far more focused and productive than I have ever been. It could be a factor of age and getting married as well, and just settling into my life. But my depression felt like something out of my con…
Same here, but with Fluoxetine (Prozac). However, I don’t think exactly that fluoxetine made me less depressed. It only made me more „aggressive“ and more risk taking, and the antidepressing effect came from the positive results of taking such risks. I just „don’t care“ about failures as much as I used to. E.g. I finally started talking to girls, because I wouldn’t care about rejection that much. => Got into my first…
I'm going to go out on a limb and guess the prominence of depression is largely caused by a broken interface with the world at large. The traps created by modern society wherein you struggle for other people's benefit are better designed than ever before. What our social machine procedurally treats as progress is advances in subjugation. Depression may often be an artifact of "efficiency" with respect to extracting v…
> In different terms, maybe we have too many rich people (exploiters) in a situation where it's clearly very foolish to keep growing in number (and productivity) to support them. Maybe we just need to rebalance our economy to make it work better for those currently exploited and endemically depressed people. Don't all those rich people also get depression? I think that rules out a marxist reading here. If you're goin…
Depression then also happens among rich people. But the source, and expression of it might differ. An anecdotal saying explains that wealth is often a barrier to create true friendships because it insulates you from society and creates antisocial thought processes: the "thinking people just want to be your friend because you're rich" rhetoric.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tom Cruise is a leading member in the fascist cult Church of Scientology, who is on record saying they can bring back people from the dead and levitate.
And? People also listen to Buddhists about depression, and Buddhists believe that enlightened people can fly! EDIT: I'm rate limited so I can't reply to the child comments: I think a majority of Buddhists believe that Buddhas and bodhisattvas have special powers. It is in a majority of the traditional scriptures, from both Mahayana and before. I don't think the authoritarian nature of scientology changes the situatio…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is the definition of an ”ad hominem” argument.
I'm comfortable with "ad hominem" when the appeal in question is to the Unabomber.
I'm going to go out on a limb and guess the prominence of depression is largely caused by a broken interface with the world at large. The traps created by modern society wherein you struggle for other people's benefit are better designed than ever before. What our social machine procedurally treats as progress is advances in subjugation. Depression may often be an artifact of "efficiency" with respect to extracting v…
> In different terms, maybe we have too many rich people (exploiters) in a situation where it's clearly very foolish to keep growing in number (and productivity) to support them. Maybe we just need to rebalance our economy to make it work better for those currently exploited and endemically depressed people. Don't all those rich people also get depression? I think that rules out a marxist reading here. If you're goin…
I'm not rooting for Marxism exactly. I think it is an extreme overcorrection, but that some correction has been and is still warranted at times, given regulatory capture and other abuses that come from concentration of power. Anti-trust action and semi-effective democracy/representation are needed.
I think we are in a society with solutions to almost every problem except for those that require cooperation on the scale we exist at, which is unprecedented.
I sympathise with the idea of mindless hard labor being more fulfilling. Working food service in the backroom as a teenager worked my body but left me less stressed mentally than anything I've done post-graduation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm comfortable with "ad hominem" when the appeal in question is to the Unabomber.
You wish to vilify him. That's fine. It's extremely uncomfortable to find that this mathematician was right about something. I respect your feelings. But that doesn't alter the substance of his social critiques.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How would you "medically disprove" the notion that some people are unhappy because the circumstances of their lives are bad rather than biological defects?
Unhappy is dramatically, completely different to depression. I've been both and they don't even feel that similar.