Engineer/Mathematician/Student. I’m not insane unless I’m in a schizoposting or distressing memes mood; I promise.

  • 2 Posts
  • 63 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 28th, 2023

help-circle
  • I would assume the downvotes are more for the “religion is a framework to be shitty” part. I’m also going to get downvoted for a similar reason.

    Religion is justification for one’s moral compass / desires.

    You see people who think it’s morally okay to rape kids or take away women’s rights or the rights of trans people or the rights of gay people etc. These people can’t justify morals (or lack thereof) logically so they use religion to give them a false sense of rationality. Hence you think religion is a framework for being shitty.

    However, there are other people who use religion to justify “good” behavior like compassion and acceptance. These people are still reliant on fallacious beliefs, but their actions are not “shitty” so they get offended. Furthermore, others—who know people in this second category—may also think the remark about religion being shitty is not correct and is rude. That’s why it’s getting downvoted.

    Fun sidenote, we can actually formally prove that religion or at least absolute morality doesn’t matter, and that people will just do what they want no matter what:


    Proof. We seek to prove that people do whatever they want regardless of the existence of a god or absolute morality. We have three natural cases:

    Case 1: Assume neither god nor an absolute purpose/morality exists. Then a person will default to their own morals. Hence, if neither exists, people will do whatever they want.

    Case 2: Assume a god or purpose/morality exists that does not align with a person’s current morals. (For example a god that required you to strangle six puppies every year or required human sacrifice, or raping kids, or blowing up hospitals, or working in finance, etc.). Then this person will not follow that god/purpose because they are a bad god/purpose. Hence, a person will do whatever they feel is right regardless even with the existence of a true deity/purpose when that god/purpose does not share their morals.

    Case 3: Assume a true god or purpose does exist and that it aligns with the morality of a person. Then that person will be living that way anyway, so the existence of the god or purpose has no effect on them doing whatever they want.

    In each case a person will do whatever they want regardless of the existence or non existence of a god or a true purpose/morality. Q.E.D.


    I should note that while I did come up with this proof myself several years ago, I learned later that Marcus Aurelius and other philosophers beat me to the punch by several centuries. But hey philosophy is the study of understanding existence, if we both exist in the same existence we can and should be able to discover the same facts about reality.


  • The whale biologist is one of the best one off characters:

    Well, you’ve come to the right guy. I’m the whale biologist, though personally I hate whales. Especially Mushu

    Then why’d you become a whale biologist?

    I don’t know you well enough to get into that.


    …and the fifth reason whales kill is for the sheer fun of it!

    Anything else?

    Yeah, your suit’s lumpy and you smell awful. Hey, I call ‘em like I see ‘em, I’m a whale biologist.


    The suit was ugly! Whale biologist.


    Introducing Mushu! The educated whale who thinks he’s better than you!


    Stop him! He’s got aquarium property!

    Better do what he says; he’s a whale biologist.


  • I was born after 2000 (though not too long after) and this is actually one of my core memories. I think about the sounds of the static and the sound of the CRT turning off all the time.

    Also, we had a really old tv in our basement till at least 2008 that had no remote, just knobs and I remember messsing with the “hue” dial all the time trying to figure out how it worked.

    The only reason that tv worked so late is that we had a black box connected to the antenna which I later learned was converting the digital signal to analog for the TV.

    Also, you’ve just reminded me that I remember the switch from analog to digital. Specifically, I remember watching Elmo talking with some adult on TV about the change. Now I really want to find that video. I think the guy was wearing a suit had short dark hair and glasses. I also think the background was pinkish purple. I want to know how accurate my memories from so long ago are. (I’ll add the link to the video in an edit if I can find it)

    Edit: I cannot find the video :(


  • As a resident pharmacy technician do you think there will ever be a day in which humans and robots can peacefully coexist?

    And on a more serious note, is there significant evidence that doing this once or twice causes lasting negative effects? Or does it have to be repeated use or extremely high dosage to do significant neurological damage?





  • hihi24522@lemm.eeto2meirl4meirl@lemmy.world2meirl4meirl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 days ago

    CW: I’m about to just complain about drugs for a while

    Want to know what fuckin sucks? Being just the wrong type of neurodivergent so none of the happy chemicals work the right way.

    Drinking tastes bad and does nothing. Unless I drink a lot in which case I just get a headache. No happiness, no confidence, just a “why am I paying for something that tastes bad and gives me a headache when I could be buying dessert or something else that actually tastes good?” Sure mixed drinks can mask the taste of alcohol well but do know what gets rid of that taste completely? Not adding it in the first place.

    When I say that to people they usually tell me to grow up or call me a kid, but honestly hell yeah. I’d take a pop over a beer any day. Tell the bartender to give me a fucking capri sun.

    Anyway, the point is alcohol does not work like a happy chemical. “Oh you’re just not drinking enough” yeah sure Jake, remember when you and I split a bottle? Oh yeah you don’t remember because you nearly blacked out. You were smiling till the end and all I got was a fucking migraine that lasted into the morning. It’s basically like my hangover starts when I start drinking and doesn’t stop till hours after I stop. So it’s just pain for no reason.

    Next, Weed does absolutely nothing for me. Doesn’t even make me tired. Possibly does make me hungry but not enough to make me certain it does. Also makes my eyes feel dry. Oh and just like alcohol, weed also tastes bad and smells bad too. But hey my friends like it when I talk about space while they’re high and I enjoy their awe. Just kinda wish it worked for me too.

    And guess what. I’m ADHD, so stimulants just make my brain tired and sometimes give me physical anxiety feelings. I am grateful that my meds help me focus and be able to make lists and stuff, but also why the fuck isn’t that just a standard feature of my brain in the first place?

    Sure I haven’t tried all the drugs, but we’re at least 10:0 of drugs I’ve tried to ones that make me happy. (Unless you count candy/chocolate as a drug), and the ones I’ve yet to try are much less accessible. Is it worth it to keep trying if most likely it’ll just be an expensive headache? Most drugs just give me a headache. The physical effects sometimes work but not the cognitive ones, not the good ones at least.

    Anyway, not to be the “you should be grateful you don’t have it worse” kind of guy, but the next time you choose to not take your suffering raw, be grateful you have that option.

    Remember kids, thank your drugs the next time you use them lol









  • hihi24522@lemm.eetomemes@lemmy.worldhow dare they
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    17 days ago

    If you assume that a “bullet” is a unit of momentum (the mass and velocity of a bullet) and “square child” is actually just referring to the mass of a child who happens to be square shaped and not the mass of a child squared, then “bullets per square child” is describing valid units for a velocity




  • hihi24522@lemm.eetoMicroblog Memes@lemmy.worldEloo
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    61
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    24 days ago

    The state (as defined by Engles, Marx, Lenin, etc.) is the problem. Like this is exactly what it does by definition.

    If the government forms an alliance with the market it becomes a slave to the market.

    There are more homes than homeless, more food than starving kids. Life saving medicines can be extremely cheap to produce but are sold for fortunes. Everywhere you look, the bourgeoisie are literally holding people’s lives for ransom… and the government does nothing.

    In fact the government does less than nothing. It is the government that facilitates the hoarding of these resources. It is the government that enforces patent laws that allow life saving medicines to be kept from those in need. It is the government that enables and legalizes this racketeering by the rich.

    When you live in a society where politicians talk equally (or more) about how they’ll help the market as they talk about how they’ll help their citizens—which is what their job is supposed to be—are you really surprised?

    Are you really surprised that a government which chooses to let its people go unhoused just to keep the real estate market up is a government in which wealth holds the power? Are you surprised that a government that shuts down worker strikes and forces compromise on the side of the exploited rather than solely on the side of exploitative corporations is a government that can be manipulated by the owner of multiple massive companies?

    There is nothing surprising here. The system is working exactly as it is intended to. The problem is not a few members of the bourgeoisie colluding to manipulate the state because that’s how the state always works. The problem is the state.

    If you would like to learn more about “the state” I suggest you read State and Revolution. That’s what made me switch from “oh we just need to tax the rich” to “the rich should not exist.” It also is just kind of impressive how Lenin describes many things that are very relevant today despite the fact he wrote this short book over a century ago.