Katrisia

@Katrisia@lemm.ee

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨...⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Even by itself, the first statement might not be the case. I don’t remember the book that well, but I remember thinking it was a good introduction to this topic. Philosophy of Science: A Very Brief Introduction by Samir Okasha.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨...⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Yet, it’s not as simple as “scientists are under capitalists’ interests”, but “the ideologies within capitalism permeate the way we do science”. A common example is how we measure functionality (and therefore pathology itself) in medicine.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨That explains it.⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  I disagree. Violence is not the answer, and especially not against people that are living in a way that doesn’t hurt others. If a couple (or polycule) wants to be sexually exclusive, they have the right to do so, and they do not hurt others because it’s not a social imposition for everyone.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨That explains it.⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  It depends. Some relationships are open to pornography, others aren’t. Some are open to sexual intercourse outside their people, but others aren’t. It’s about consent and agreeing to live in a way that all needs are met.

  That’s why I said it’s hard to know who is betraying their partner and who isn’t, because maybe a man or woman or whoever following an erotic/pornographic content creator is not outside what their partner(s) expect, or maybe they are. Still, I do not like people breaking their “contacts” instead of talking them out.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨That explains it.⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  If I were to do that, I’d probably do it for the money. I would get unfaithful followers (hard to pinpoint who because open relationships and other types of relationships exist, but statically, there will be), and that wouldn’t make it any less uncomfortable. I personally hate unfaithful/dishonest partners.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨It genuinely upsets me that Valve spent their time and resources on another Dota variation⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  Let’s move on.

  I enjoy MOBAs a lot, but their communities tend to be so toxic… I’m playing other multiplayer games because I am tired of the toxicity (among other things).

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨is it possible to be married and still feel lonely?⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  As many have already told you, people need more than just physical companionship.

  I’d add that some people cannot be happy even with a healthful environment because of internal or personal issues. For example, certain cluster B personality disorders or traits cause that people feel empty deep down. They will enjoy things for a while, but often return to feeling incomplete, disconnected, etc.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Hero⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  This might sound pedantic, but it isn’t, it was actually naive: I expected a better environment in academia when I was young.

  Why? Because academia is supposedly full of bright people, and I assumed they would be bright enough to be cooperative (because academia advances more when we are, and they supposedly love knowledge); unattached from superficiality (like judging people by their looks, money, etc., because they should know an interesting person can come in any “package”); relatively ethical (as bright people should figure out something close to the categorical imperative, although with unique details); a non-dogmatic, eager to learn and correct their ideas —over preferring recognition and pettiness— attitude (again, just because I assumed their intelligence must guide them towards appreciating knowledge and authenticity over much more ephemeral and possibly worthless things such as prizes, fame, etc.).

  I was wrong, so wrong. It’s painful to remember how I felt when I realized it…

  But I think the premises weren’t entirely off, I just imagined people much wiser and more intelligent than they are, myself included. Anyway, I fully understand why others are shocked too.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨This is not a record to be proud of.⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  You’re thinking of April Jesus. This is December Jesus.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Tacos.⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  I am going to make some very broad strokes here. So no armchair quarterbacking me. I know it’s way more nuanced but I’m not writing an essay on Lemmy.

  In general Western philosophies always have a “goal.”

  I know you said it was a broad stroke, and that in general is that way, but I kind of disagree still. I think Western philosophy is about finding if we have a purpose and what is it, and many philosophers since Greek antiquity to today have answered they are skeptic of it existing or it being able to be known. From Pyrrho of Elis and Hegesias of Cyrene to Arthur Schopenhauer and Slavoj Žižek.

  The word we are looking for is teleology (not to be confused with theology). It refers to finality, that there is a goal. Many philosophers did not subscribe to a teolology.

  Your human life is to prove your worthiness.

  Same thing as before.

  You need to look back and atone for your past mistakes. You need to look forward so you can do the right things to be worthy. It is very little about being in the now.

  I agree a little more with this, there are many Western philosophers preoccupied with ethics. But that’s why I think they were talking of different dimensions. It was not that existentially you should roam the past or future, that your mental activity should be there. It was about being responsible in the now for the future, and to be held accountable for your past. It was a morality thing, not a conscious/existential thing.

  In this case tacos are the moment. So next time you’re eating a delicious taco. Spend that moment to be one with your taco. Concentrate on the smell. Then feel the texture as you pick it up. How the various colors interact with each other. Then as you bite off some, feel the textures in your mouth and how the flavors interact. Watch yourself, be aware of every time you chew. Remember there is no past there’s no future there is only tacos.

  Hey! Go away with that mindful nonsense. If I do that, I spend too much time with a single bite and I cannot eat as much (/s).

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Images leak of Valve's next game, and it's an Overwatch-style hero shooter⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  SMITE isn’t a shooter, though. Overwatch 2 killed Overwatch and left an empty space. I don’t see a problem if two games (or more) try to fill it. I hope they are fun.

  That said, it shouldn’t be Valve’s only focus if fans are expecting different games from them.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Girl power⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  I thought it was him, William Whewell, in response to an almost rant from Samuel Taylor Coleridge about “natural philosophers” (today’s scientists) not deserving to be called “philosophers”.

  I just googled it and found:

  Coleridge stood and insisted that men of science in the modern day should not be referred to as philosophers since they were typically digging, observing, mixing or electrifying—that is, they were empirical men of experimentation and not philosophers of ideas.

  […]

  There was much grumbling among those in attendance, when Whewell masterfully suggested that in “analogy with artist we form scientist.” Curiously this almost perfect linguistic accommodation of workmanship and inspiration, of the artisanal and the contemplative, of the everyday and the universal –was not readily accepted.

  Yeah, that was the story I’d heard.

  Another source says:

  Coleridge declared that although he was a true philosopher, the term philosopher should not be applied to the association’s members. William Whewell responded by coining the word scientist on the spot. He suggested

  by analogy with artist, we may form scientist.

  It’s funny because nobody remembers S. T. Coleridge as a philosopher but only as a poet. I’ve read that his philosophical writings were like an eccentric and almost immature version of German idealism. The thing that haunts me is that famous F. Schelling is well read but often misunderstood, so if they both were part of the romantic movement and they were both close to idealism, it could be that they both suffer the same fate.

  Anyway, I digressed. That was the story I knew. Basically, a gatekeeping poet separated philosophers and natural philosophers.

  It’s even curious because there are rumours about men like Coleridge being “half-mad”, and recently there have been studies on it. It would be ridiculous (just as history tends to be) if an old mad poet had divided these branches of knowledge on a fit of bad moods.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨As someone who is aging. Late thirties. How can I keep my finger on the pulse of current trends, particularly in music?⁩ ⁨⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  I’m from the 90s and I’ve been catching few trends thanks to TikTok and YouTube. Exactly what you said, new videos and keep jumping to suggested videos. Also, read the comments, people often have recommendations (you can even ask and you’ll get some new musicians).

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Chad Diogenes⁩ ⁨⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  I get rather irritated with those arguments because they only return to the start. “Here, a world”. “Is it how we experienced it, though, and why and how; if not, what’s behind?”. “Bullshit, a world”. That’s hardly an answer. And, personally, it feels intellectually dishonest because the question was larger than just “is there a world?”.

  I prefer an answer like saying that doubting the world in any form might be a mistake on its own because [reasons]. I do not agree, but at least there’s explanations and communication.

  Also, I think they are fighting a straw man. For instance, I doubt many things about the Universe, our knowledge, our minds, etc. Yet, I accept there are phenomena which appear to me. This has been the case since the ancient school of skepticism, and I have yet to meet a person which declares themself a skeptic and does not do this to some degree. For example, I know I’m hungry right now. I don’t know if the pain is real in any other deeper level, or if it is like the pain in a dream that goes away when one wakes up, or a delusion that is felt without external stimuli, or whatever. I don’t know the nature of it, yet it is an experience I must attend. I can even add that the mechanisms behind, the anatomical knowledge and such is useful, but it might be entirely wrong or be as illusory as the pain itself. The straw man is that skeptics would say: “I don’t know if I’m really feeling hungry”, “I don’t know if I want to eat” or something like that.

  Why does it matter, then? Because it changes everything. In my case, it made me go from a realist teenager to an instrumentalist adult in science. From an atheist teenager to an agnostic adult.

  The discussion derives in many interesting branches too. The mere “does it matter if the world is different from what we perceive if we cannot perceive it in any other way?” is an example. Many people answer yes or no without justifying it. And, at this point, some people might be wondering why we need to justify every single belief we hold and every single thing we say, like the ones throughout my comment, and that in itself is a new good question that emerges. The possibility of having any of these conversations is also a good question, and so on…

  So philosophy is not going too far, in my opinion. Some philosophers might go too far, but I really think they are rare (or misunderstood).

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Discord Shuts Down Servers for Switch Emulators Suyu & Sudachi; Disables Lead Developers Account As Well⁩ ⁨⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  I liked Revolt.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Philosophy⁩ ⁨⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  Analytic philosophers are suspiciously stable…

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨No wonder Jesus didn't get a fair trial...⁩ ⁨⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  and if you give to charity, you will harm your spirits.

  Huh? Is this about obligatory alms/tithes or is it about any kind of help to others, or both?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Sophie's choice 70s edition⁩ ⁨⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  I think that if the age of consent is gradual, the age difference allowed should too.

  First scenario, two 15 year olds decide to start their sexual life together. They’re fully informed. Nobody is taking advantage. It’s very different to a second scenario where a 17 year old is dating a 36 year old.

  It’s funny because the problem is usually described with terms these specific French philosophers used: power dynamics. It is too unbalanced. The adult has way more power than the teenager and that’s not healthy, it can even be dangerous.

  I would argue that we should be careful with age differences until our early-mid twenties, even if the law gives us a free pass from our 18th birthday. But, anyway, yeah, in the second scenario, the teenager is older than the first ones, so we’d assume that if the first ones were okay, the second too, but the age difference matters IMHO.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨So, basically 75% of deviantart?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  Have you heard the “I don’t suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it” quote? They meant it, huh?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨I'm not asking to be rich.⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  With luck, it buys a state in which we can find happiness.

  Is it possible to be happy without money? I’d say it’s only possible for extraordinary people, not for the majority of us.

  Is it possible to have money and still not be happy? Of course, many people have money but still feel empty, lonely, misunderstood, apathetic, bitter, regretful, etc. And many people have money, but they cannot be happy because their health is bad and it is not solvable, not even with their riches (e.g. treatment resistant depression, terminal cancer).

  I’d say, for almost everyone, money is a necessary condition for happiness, but it is not a sufficient condition.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨I have fire arms therefore you are wrong⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  Apparently, Lemmy doesn’t believe the man who writes misogynistic lyrics can be sexist. It’s the same all over the internet. Quoting Reddit users:

  a) Rammstein’s lyrics can be rather extreme, as they often include rape, incest, death, sex tourism, necrophilia, etc etc. But are they sexist? No I don’t think so.

  b) A lot of their songs are out of someone’s perspective. Like Ausländer can be perceived as a sexist song written from a perspective a dude (Till lol) shagging his way around the world and seducing local populace with his foreign allure and hilariously low effort “knowledge of the local language”. […] On the other hand what the band actually intended to do is criticize colonialism.

  One does not need to believe the sexual allegations to see that, still, something’s fishy, especially with the lead singer. The lyrics, the orgies, etc. For years, I have disliked songs and interviews because of this, but it all gets the “It’s satire” or “It’s symbolism” pass.