Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: koan who wrote (480272)	9/29/2021 4:49:04 PM
From: cosmicforce	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541179

>> Bertrand Russell, or Einstein being existentialists, both were without questions existentialists. en.wikipedia.org Defining (emphasis added): Existentialism is a form of philosophical inquiry that explores the problem of human existence and centers on the experience of thinking, feeling, and acting. [3] [4] I'd have to disagree about Bertrand Russell's Existentialism - he was about logic - not the emotions of the human experience which are highly personal and subjective. As co-author of Principia Mathematica - a difficult to read tome to say the least where all the assumptions are laid out prior to proving 1+1 = 2 ( somewhat (in)famously on page 379 in first edition), it is certainly different in character than other existential works. theguardian.com In his 1946 essay, Russell teaches his "laymen" readers to think more objectively about emotive issues: "When, in a sentence expressing political opinion, there are words that arouse powerful but different emotions in different readers, try replacing them by symbols, A, B, C, and so on and forgetting the particular significance of the symbols. Suppose A is England, B is Germany and C is Russia. So long as you remember what the letters mean, most of the things you will believe will depend upon whether you are English, German or Russian, which is logically irrelevant."

To: koan who wrote (480272)	9/29/2021 5:50:30 PM
From: epicure	1 Recommendation Recommended By Terry Maloney Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 541179

Ok- here's the deal. If the mainstream movies are stupid, then it is because the people watching them WANT stupid. And they want stupid because a lot of them are stupid. The fact that today's movies are too stupid for you to watch kind of cuts against your argument using old stupid movies...

To: koan who wrote (480272)	9/29/2021 8:29:59 PM
From: bentway	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541179

Watch 'Midnight Mass' on Netflix. Puts Christianity in a whole new frame!

To: koan who wrote (480272)	9/30/2021 8:59:18 AM
From: Cautious_Optimist	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541179

Research shows every year the number of atheists increases and this, IMO, is the result of us getting smarter, seeing reality more clearly as guided by science. There is obviously a lot more filtered information available in this "information age" where data and knowledge is spread more widely and cheaply. Perhaps that accounts for our powerful progressive bubble as well as Q-Anon and rising fascism on the right? There is no accepted evidence that people across classes are internally "smarter." I know you believe in an extended form of Lemarkism but I do not share this, due to the evidence from modern molecular biology of reproduction. Traditional IQ tests (and many standardized "achievement" tests) are racist and ethnocentric, reflecting the hidden bias of those who developed the tests. If one argues that its modern diets, sleep and going to the gym -- well that is not inherited and does not impact real people generally. In fact many argue our modern diets (fast foods, sugar beverages, chemical processed meats and fats etc.) are having very negative affects, other than those who can afford AND consciously choose the best choices and diets. One could make an equal rhetorical argument people are dumber than ever. While you equate atheism with intelligence, anti-abortionists seem to be thriving from Pennsylvania to Texas. Disinformation and misinformation spread easily-- ironically propagated by VERY EDUCATED and smart people to the fearful emotional herds who probably don't watch existential foreign films or read Jean-Paul Sartre, The Economist or the Journal of Quantum Computing