Posts made by myrea

unfortunately spain is not alone in scandals… most of the actual euro zone leaders have deep problems with corruption... the portuguese one for starter... just look to his CV and die laughing, and the ministers... now even the germans have problems apparently... This with also the voices of some politicians which are anti gay marriage and want to abolish it again, and with the rise of gay deaths by murder... I said it once and I say it again, people should look to europe and pression up their governments not to screw it up humanitarially

:hmmm: Going back to Topic… and forgive me if anyone get's mad at the info I'm about to tell because it messe's with anyone's faith...

The 5 cities especially Sodom were located as we know by descriptions near a massive sismic flaw in a sea (dead sea?) aniway such flaw actually gushed and was rich in nafta or petra oleum (oil)... which has the bible tells made the cities very rich, and their sin was not greed but more the non giving, the jews or people of israel wanted hand on that market, and none of the cities allowed it... as with any sismic flaw plus oil there was a major destruction when there was a earthquake and basically the cities disappeared one momment to the other in a rain of fire has mentioned, even the statues of salt can be explained by the rain of salt rock of the sea... so the whole gay thing actually happened centuries later and got worst since then, nothing to do with the original text or history that can be geologically proven.

The bible must be read has an anthology of prephilosophy, and the characters are all non existant I'm sorry to say, only some of the eldest saints actually have been proven to exist, Jesus Christ is a title not an actual persons name and he was not mentioned by any historier at the time be it greek, roman or other... and well someone which did what he did would be, but why wasn't him... because he embodies monomyths and knowledge from diferent entities... Jesus don't says anything new actually, he mixes the Plato dialogues of love and the "republic" Aristotles, Apolonius actual works and fuses with Buhdist, Hindu and diverse european beliefs like the Etruscans...  The bible copies the words very clearly from the original texts, sometimes it fuses more to follow a plot or political argument, however the whole question which I read above of Mary's virginity... the parthenogenesis of christ is supposed to be a quote of the birth of Venus... as Venus so does Christ is a god of love which walks above the waters and comes to reign over time and death... see Sandro Botticelli painting, it's allegorical not supposed to be taken as an historical fact, it was only after the protestant reformation that people starten to read the bible has a true historical fact and not has a guideline myth for the soul, why... because now any nutjob with cash could read a very misstranslated version of the already meddled latin version.

Actually the original peoples were very lax in sex... and the bible even mentions that child sexslaves of the gentile races could be taken.

@agis:

So here I think we have worked out by now the original James's subject. Dealing with the argument we have ended with is complex and potentially dangerous myr cause philosophy could look a fashionable game but, as a matter of fact,it's very serious and with possible social consequences as the sad Giordano Bruno's and other ones fado has showed.  

HMMM Fashionable and philosophy in the same sentence in the current times?  :funny2:  :bighug:

@agis:

Ihihihihihihii   It was quite an assist to you and Spinny speaking of Damasio wasn't it myr?  ^-^ and no, I'm not a fan of Derrida: I don't like the dualists's elaborated smokescreens. In the French environment you could find very close to mine positions in the thought of the late Paul Valery but this is another story (or not?).
Back in topic though, it was an assist cause, more than what you have already remembered about Antonio, one of his main basic interests is and has always been the revaluation of the feelings/emotional side. Of course an impertinent mole could object to Antonio that the true problem doesn't stand in that revaluation but in understanding the weakness of all those approaches which make the man not the master but the slave of her/his own artifacts.
The problem for a scientist of the second foundation is not so to raise one of the possible human attitudes over the other ones but to understand instead how many could they be and how could they work. Btw myr and Spinny do you know whom Isaac Asimov was and his idea of a second foundation?  ^-^

Context… Damásio had a rather traumatic issue here with the deonthology and ethics of the medical class, there was a huge mind shift from the humane base of his generation and the actual one which is far more commercial... however not dwelling in that and charging to Asimov, since you are asking politely I think he is a sweet little boy in that area, he is overly naïf to the nature of the machinery in which he dwells, for me it's a pure pretense to define foundation, and more to consider that there will be change in such terms... I won't even call the nature of men in this, I'll call interest and unpolitical behaviour on it and History as representation, Mass media to finish it all up in a nice little package it's a Info high culture provided by market, you can throw Paranoia Corruption Conspiracy as Propaganda and all that knowledge is what really? So I would not count in a  second foundation, for all that Damásio lived and I observed it's a rather foundation 1 type B (make it simpler and more dangerous)

@agis:

Ok myr in this detached objectivity one could attribute ideologically negative values or even not values at all cause, for instance, in the music domain, we could take into account the simple study of a score for a performance which would leave apart , at the beginning, value considerations. You must not worry though I'm not totally devoid of emotions babe  :hug2:. But a thing I was never up to was to live an emotional and a rational attitude together. When there was one of them it seemed to me I couldn't have  the other one at the same time. Very interesting studies about these matters have been performed in the phisicalist field of the neurosciences by a renowned compatriot of yours, Antonio Damasio and this very thing had also raised the philosophical interests much before as he himself had to notice in his main popular works . Following this path would lead us  elsewhere though. Back in topic I must admit  that   historical arrangement I had left you with has been commonly done/made by many authors but has never fully persuaded me. If we generally agree in attributing to the mind activity the physical place known as brain we must also acnowledge in the last 40000 and more years it doesn't seem to have undergone particular changes. I feel so easier to think that all our possible attitudes had to be already there indipendently from the historical,anthropological agreements. Btw myr, according to you, could it be possible for some not human animals to be religious/domatic or scientists?  ^-^

That felt like brain sex, first "Antonio Damasio" not only genius also a great guy, in the essay "Descartes error" raises the bigger issue of thanatos so in order to process all his reasoning in the range of the human core would take me so many shivers and orgasms…  henceforth reverting to pop for a quick dose watch "evangelion" from Anno Hideaki or "ergo proxy" if you are a fan of Derrida, tho "ghost in the shell" might make you wet.

In the last 40000 years it hasn't change i's debatable, physiologically the main anatomy no, however synapses and neuropeptides or even chemics are basicly individual we have no way to tell if there has been retuning to deal with the info high we now live in. I recall that evolution also takes millions of years to make adaptations so don't rush it babe it likes it slow and deep.

"Btw myr, according to you, could it be possible for some not human animals to be religious/domatic or scientists?"
According to facts both the hormonal (reptilean brain) and emotional core (limbic system) and even lobes are present in animals, to go at it harsh science might tells us that they have an emotional core but I have no idea how emotions are processed in their lobes, and you have the observer issue you are interpreting emotions in other animals, they do have logic and reasoning, so your question would also involve if their shown emotions or behaviour takes birth in logic of the imperative, like a cat purring because you are giving it attention or food, and a dog barking because you are trespassing it's territory? That would leads us straight back to the puppy experience unfortunately human's can't read very well baby animals expression (we are very, very dumb you see not like moles). So are animals more rational or emotional... since we are an animal and we tend to the emotional side I say it's individual even in them... scientists pshaw who would want to be a scientist when you could be my pet?  Religious/dogmatic non humans, all cat's are luciferian they love Crawley too, seriously I do not have the most remote idea if any non human is able to process the concept of an universal or groupal cogniscience like God, I think we stumbled upon that around the imperatives of survival, however since the universe is huge I would not bet against the odds.

Hmm we have to consider the spectrum and range of emotions agis.. indifference and detatchment are very close to the anallitic point of logic however with different mechanisms, not that I'm going around logic as part of human emotions, I'm just wondering if you are not rather in the similitude of a more detatched perspective of Feeelingsss lalala than a logical analysis of the music and content, because even that analysis is based in a world of emotion written by and for that world… so that comprehension of romaticism is needed in it to be logical.

The Daddy issue is the curse of the most typical God, you want it to help you and you blame him when things don't work...

Spintendo the uncertainty fugue is a both sides card, it allows more possibilities as allows more ends, tho I grant that it's on an emotional and nonlogic mainframe of a baby so a good and valid hypothesis, however cooperation is not entirely supported by evolution actually in order to cooperate you brain process and overall capabilities get lower, as an individual people work better than in groups, however in order to build or live socially cooperation is vital, aniway food for thought.

Agis I won't go to judicial moral since for me law and rights are very far apart from actual justice or moral, they act as a very flawed proxy, there are more loop holes and unmoral laws even for the period which they belong, than I rather know or care about… laws can also be fairly unsocial and unpopular to be socially moral, law takes birth in control over property, I am still going around why there even exist some laws, and then you have this mayhem of morals the individual anarchism or the society dystopia.. it's chisms all around, what matters is where does morality has root on, and yes it shows on all this things, but that is the show, we want the mechanism... and we already know that is all around "we want this as a basis and we don't want this as a basis" because experience says so... but what more forms the process? I'm going for a combination rather than only a basic thing ( science tell us that easy and simple route is the right one, but science has been fucking that up a lot so I'm believing this to be fairly more complex) I wonder too if anyone cares to ramble upon the origin of religion eheheh someone needed a daddy figure?

@agis:

No Spinny I think the foundation of moral is simply the imperative. Then so said of course,starting from that, you can build upon  and introduce feelings or other kind of possible constructions including the possibility the imperative can be found in an ex-post objectivity thanks to the intervention of deity/ies. If moral was based upon the feelings this kind of statement couldn't resist to  all the counterfactuals concerning the numerous cases when feelings have not dictated and still don't dictate moral but immoral behaviours  :).

And that is basicly what happens for many reasons, before all the imperative and action-reaction develpoment are known to come after the emotional response development, you hit a baby he/she cries and he/she does not know yet what is reflection in mirror or that an hidden object has not vanished from existence, this has been studied in the babies psy and explains most of the psy disturbia like mental illness also, morals are a concept and immorality lies inside it because it's only an adaptation of regular morality, the hormonal core,  the emotions core (limbic system) is older than the logic core (lobes) in the brain, and your hypocampus are actually worked up to save memory emotionally,  what happens in the maturity of a mind is that your superego (conscience) the logic core,  refreins your ego (emotional needs) the limbic, in order to maintain social moral as pertained by the developped imperative… however this is by no means a peacefull conflict, or else we wouldn't have mental illness, actually the ego and the limbic are so powerfull that most of the times you know you are making things wrong and illogic and you blame it on hormones...and there lies a whole million dollar question why is it so easy to bend moral, if not because the imperactive actually is taking birth and operating in an emotional perspective or mainframe. Other Question is the mental preposition of the psycho and sociopath there the cut of emotional connection create an associal imperative...  so I suppose we would have to find a consensus to all psychic disturbia and trauma to be logic, in order to find the birth of morals in the human psy.

@AndyZ:

(1)  Submit a new upload –-- earn upload credit and receive bonus seed points from other users
(2)  Seed downloaded torrents --- earn upload credit and 0.5 seed points per hour

(5)  Donate for upload credit
(6)  Send invitations to friends for 2 GB bonus upload credit
(7)  Submit pictures for torrents with less than 10 total pictures for 1 bonus seed point per picture

1- That would depend on your bandwidth many user's will have a hard time uploading something bigger than clips
2- I agree but 0.5 couldn't it be a whole seed per hour that would be great for the users
5- Is it an entirely anonymous process? I'm speacking out of ignorance here.
6- Don't you have to spend seedbonus to make invitations?
7- I loathe when people post more and more of the same pics, many obviously blown up and pixelized ò_ó besides I per exemple don't seem to be able to post pics above the 60kb size

You jumped on the windows 8 wagon a bit too soon, they are yet revamping the whole OS to clean errors glitchs and overall compatibility, so if you can surf to the compatibility mode and chose windows 7 you might be lucky, probably windows 8 will be (cleaner and airier) in a year or so, personally I'll stay with 7 'till 9 release and see the reviews like a hawk.

Pastol, I used war as contrast but you might have subtler adaptations like prejudice as an example, people very usually bend morals or adapt them,  the important is to have a stable core and you would function even with an unstable moral core, and well the "normal" well normal as in average… I shiver to think what statistics might tells us about society average moral; but yes one thing are thought another is action, I understand your train of logic.

Agis Piaget studies based on his kids are a tad to biased since the upbringing has nothing to do with the average upbringing, however theoretically it's interesting. And my guess is that he was thinking pleasure (libido) = good and destrudo = bad... rather crude I know,  I wonder what Jung would think?  :blink:

Mainly religious thought is arched by a pretense of spiritual path which is allegories and rites which explain the mythology, so it's dogmatic and fixated and more in an alter "superego" proxy (God), meanwhile ethic thought relies on doubt cinycal philosophy and questioning of reality phenomena, so it's more flexible and relatable to the "individual ego" I.

I  :love: this topic

Blacks on boys, black machines, black bombers, black bandits, and even the it's gonna hurt feature smaller guys too, and the 5 blacks a whitey boy, or any black sugar production, if you browse the site there is a good amount of it.

@agis:

Very nice vid Spinny. Of course there can be convictions of ours we individually feel as such from empirical individual experiences which may be interesting to investigate and put through experimental controlled repetitions into a scientifical frame. Well done so. But in my opinion Kiley's claim to deem the babies behaviour as right or wrong is a bit unjustified and so ideological. The babies there imo simply choose the impersonated alternatives which seem to open new possiilities, to enlarge their horizons. Often, in fact, infancy is considered as that very moment when all the horizons start and have to open. Personally I'd consider those reactions as lead by this opening pleasure  more than an awareness of a good and right which, in themselves, could even not exist at all. Right?

Yes but you do have to take in account the understated self preservation psichology behind the scenes enacted, the babies are picking as you said the alternative which allows more possibilities, but they are also not picking the one which ends them, it's self preservation also, which is the mainframe of what you will consider as good and bad in future too however vague those as concepts do are. Tho I really sympathise with Pastol's text however at a part he is speacking more of logic than morals, as logic can apply in many different times and cultures so you can figure things out, however that is not morals, that is mainly logic adjusting your moral conduct to see which values should be prioritary in the new reality, because you do not have the same code of conduct in a warzone that you have in a peacefull civilized beach but apart from that I really like his text.

For me Religion as a medium group for knowledge has flaws like ulterior agendas, and well it's a composed group so you'll have more individual personality disorders  jamming up on your notion of "truth", it's preferable to be a little more anarchic in your process to get your individual "truth".

@jamesbr66:

Did morality begin with religion or has it been an evolving concept/characteristic within human nature?"

Historically and in many areas the answer would be NO… you do not get your morals threw religion, they are result of logic or rational thought about empirical enviromnental experiences mostly, and as Yale studies suggest some are already encoded in our genome... science has been a kind of kinder mentor, you do have no religious people and atheists which are far from immoral, secularism actually gave you most of your modern morals, and morality has vague defenitions, the morality is synched with the culture of the individual, can we say that the moral code or values of a warlord in Liberia are less moral than the one's one norwegian scientist has? Their entire reality is so distant, so let's regeneralize this; good and evil are concepts in evolution, the best way to further this is to analyse the defenition of religion and exemplifying... "thou shalt not lay with your neighbours wife" well, not because God would be really pissed with you, but also because that would lead logically to your neighbour get upset and perhaps do something drastic, and think about the time it was written... the poor women would be stoned, so you would loose your loved even if you got away, and well you could get an std from the neighbour, so yep many possible reasons in logic alone for that... and if religion was the root of morals then why would there be so many completely immoral logic in so many of it's teachings by our actual standpoint morality? In the example an adulterous women would be stoned to death, in Islam the penalty to stop being muslin is death... (and this would seam even a bit illogic in the times so many are yet saven) granted there are less extreme religions, however if you paid attention you'd see that all values and morals come from the action-reaction bynom and the logic of phenomena according to a viewpoint of reality... religion acts more like a medium of sorts it does not create morality it channels already known action/reactions so to warn you.

Actually most of our civilization is based on greek philosophy and this relates directly, plus you should respect people which have a religious belief which is positive and harmless... like Santa Klaus and the easter bunny ahahah, religion is a concept so to respect it you'ld have to respect it's logical evolution to adapt to our actual situation, you cannot respect religion if it's harmfull and unadapted to your situation, you get a riot or opression.

If the title made you roll your eyes brace yourself for pure idioticy, I'm translating this to english.

When it comes to marriage, in France there is no discrimination against homosexuals. So says the leader of the Christian Democratic Party, Christine Boutin, a statement on Christmas Eve that claimed that gays already can marry unless it is with someone of the same sex.

"Everyone has the right to marriage," he said Boutin, who became Minister under Nicolas Sarkozy, with the folder of Housing and Urban Development. "Homosexuals can obviously get married to someone of the opposite sex," stressed the Christian Democrat leader, in an interview with iTele, being hopeful that thousands of people involved in anti-gay marriage rally that is scheduled for 13 January 2013.

And why can not gays marry each other? "Because marriage provides, through carnal relationship, the hope of birth. Marriage is therefore not at all a matter of love," says the same responsible politics, in a passage that is available in online video.

Boutin was in 1999, the opposition to the civil pact, in France, a law authorizing civil unions between same sex.

The issue of gay marriage is very much present at this point in the political debate in France. In early November, just days before the French Government had approved a plan for the introduction of marriage between people of the same gender in French law, a BVA poll, released by AFP, suggested that 58% of French people are in favor of legalizing gay marriage . However, this value was lower than that registered in another survey in 2011, which gave 63% of the French as supporters of this cause.

In the campaign that elected Francois Hollande as President, this socialist who defeated Nicolas Sarkozy had promised a gender legislation by mid-2013. A preliminary version of the draft legislation will be considered in Parliament in January 2013. If passed, France would become the 12th country to authorize marriage between persons of the same sex.

In Público

Now yes you should procreate so to have your children live an infancy in which the parents don't even like each other that is good education to Boutin apparently, she seams also unaware that gays are far from sterile, in virto fertilization, sperm banks, adoption and other ways seam too surreal to her…

Joyeux Noël Dax

Hmm mid medieval period, I actually like armoury Agis you should check  this one hxxp://3.bp.blogspot.com/_ZVIRkrGR5Kw/TMgkAhw6q8I/AAAAAAAAAkU/PA7vqf7fT4k/s1600/d.sebastiao.jpg tho unsuited for a mole it's quite worth the view, and the delphin has quite the story for it would be a very queer king which vanished in mid of a battle in the fog, which is becoming quite the feature of the Hapsburg family both in the bed preferences and the overly dramatic deaths.

I declare tie and mostly because I like blonds hxxp://piecesandmelodies.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/thomas-penfound-by-stefan-zschernitz-metal-25-a-w-2011-iv.jpg

Thomas Penfound why are you straightttt :blownose:

ahahah 2 and 4 seem pretty fine :lovp: :freehug: :ecake:

"He was a beautiful man with bright green eyes, tanned skin and brown hair and he was clearly kind and intelligent. I would gladly have chatted to him for hours but…I didn't want anything more."

Yeah but he rembered every detail even the plucked eyebrow... I'd say he was interested but yes since he was forced into the macho stand he can't accept a non macho behaviour, it's the mirror effect you dislike in others what you can't stand in yourself... and he admits he knows he is not all that macho, but alas he also states that he is just not interested he does not bash them, my really huge concern his calling the average not butch joe (it has went beyound the femme already it's every gay which is not in straight trend) a women... all I can say to those people is, well for straight guys you are a fucking little girl too... it's the cycle of hatred, people forced you and you try to force me, except I'm way over your bitchyness.