Philosophy: Pedophilia, consent, veganism, killing the sover

noumenon appears to be non-dumb.
noumenon
Monfd: I know
Monfd
nondumbenon?
Monfd
It is interesting how effective psychedelics seem to be in improving mental well-being.
noumenon
milkness: enjoy reading critique of pure reason
noumenon
you'll be repeating it over and over
Monfd
And that their effect is long-term.
noumenon
that's gold
noumenon
Kestlah: Edgar Mitchell did not have a psychotic break
buff3r has left IRC (Quit: leaving)
noumenon
also, the insitute for noetic sciences does excellent research, such as experiments rigorously proving that you can consciously affect wave function collapse
noumenon
http://deanradin.com/evidence/Radin2012doubleslit.pdf
noumenon
Kestlah: the evidence is clear, and only demonstrates what has been known for millennia (and is in fact eternal truth); replicate the experiments yourself
Monfd
noumenon: What constitutes an observer is unresolved in cosmology, apparently.
Monfd
Therefore, I don't think it's as meaningful as you might think to say that humans can or cannot collapse wave functions.
callow has joined (~herk@45.76.27.197)
tessera has joined (~iraQi@45.76.27.197)
noumenon
wrong; any act of perception collapses the wave function into one distinct reality
Monfd
Some world class cosmologists think the observer must have self-referencing state, others think objects like photons can be observers, and others don't think observers are a meaningful entity.
Monfd
noumenon: That was a non sequitur.
Monfd
Nobody claimed humans cannot collapse wave functions.
noumenon
thus, even if you have a large chain of measuring devices, none of them meaningfully constitute observers, as your reality doesn't collapse until you measure any of them
Monfd
False.
Monfd
It's not known an 'act of perception' is necessary.
noumenon
True.
Monfd
It is sufficient, though.
noumenon
yes, reality is perception
Monfd
Non sequitur.
noumenon
wrong
noumenon
Kestlah: Edgar Mitchell didn't have a psychotic break
Monfd
The channel Closer to Truth on Youtube interviewed about 12 world class cosmologists on what constitutes an observer.
Monfd
There was almost no consensus whatsoever.
Monfd
One of the leaders of the seminar couldn't meaningfully define an observer.
noumenon
deference to authority constitutes stupidity
Monfd
It's a 'dirty little secret' in quantum mechanics.
Monfd
False.
noumenon
I'm the world class cosmologist as far as I'm concerned
noumenon
True.
noumenon
Not false.
Monfd
Science is a knowledge hierarchy, and there is correlation between institutional authority and understanding of the field.
noumenon
wrong
noumenon
it is nothing of the kind
noumenon
and there's no such correlation
Monfd
Our conversation is currently in a poor state.
Monfd
Claims that 'there is no correlation' is likely to be false, and it points to mental states that are not congruent with good dialogue between people.
Monfd
Claiming there is a correlation is a weak thesis.
noumenon
"points to mental states that are not congruent with good dialogue between people"
noumenon
when all else fails, claim the opponent's mental state is in jeopardy
noumenon
apparently deference to authority and negation didn't work that well
Monfd
That was an unfriendly interpretation of my last post.
Monfd
The mental states of participants in conversations is highly relevant, as that's the generating process for the posts.
noumenon
wrong
Monfd
You can think of it as cognitive or personal structuralism.
02:08 noumenon
yes, a false assumption
Monfd
Notable systems of thought have direct and immediate support for this framework, e.g. Buddhism.
noumenon
Monfd: again, wrong
Monfd
noumenon: I am taking a 15 minute break from interacting with you.
Monfd
Reason: I think your mental state is not congruent with high quality dialogue.
Monfd
Recommendation: A reset in which we assume the other has good intentions.
easel has joined (~lila@220-235-65-116.dyn.iinet.net.au)
easel
Hello #philosophy.
easel
Hi fr33d0g....
easel
If paedophillia were a sickness what would you do to cure it? If paedophillia were a choice what could you do to dissuade it?
easel
How could you contextualise something so dreadfully taboo and create thereof something more useful, or perhaps, create some direction forward?
easel
But in essence there is some need to intervene?
easel
The desire itself is not chosen but the objects are realised by what is opportune.
Monfd
easel: Do you think pedophilia warrants special consideration?
Monfd
easel: Pedophilia is known to be largely genetic/non-choice.
easel
What creates this conundrum? Is it the unavoidable outcome of the force of lust or is it created by a situation of power and it's correlative inferiority.
easel
I would think that paedophillia warrants a special consideration because of its apparently aberrant nature.
Monfd
easel: How would you defend the claim it is "aberrant", given the theory of evolution?
easel
If you reduce it to causality then you have no means to comprehend its expression.
easel
I claim it is aberrant based upon its current social consideration.
easel
It's a double bind. A catch 22.
Monfd
15 minutes has elapsed.
easel
If we cannot work with it constructively we banish it to the basket of 'too difficult', all then is left is to destroy it.
Monfd
easel: I think pedophilia is not a complex ethical problem.
Monfd
I don't think the evidence supports a view that pedophilia is ethically complex.
Monfd
I think it is relatively 'trivial'.
Monfd
I can elaborate. The view it is ethically complex is almost all intelligent design for the unconscious taboo responses by a large portion of our species in response to this phenomenon.
noumenon
Kestlah: did you just make the assumption that I practice pedophilia, or that people in the studies are either in prison or pedophiliacs?
Monfd
It readily dissolves to a straightforward language-based analysis of it as has been done by Greeks for at least 2400 years.
noumenon
Monfd: justifying pedophilia with evolution; nice
noumenon
really classy
noumenon
pedophilia is aberrant behavior with respect to natural law itself, it has nothing to do with evolution or social conditions
Monfd
noumenon: Please quote where I justified pedophilia with evolution.
noumenon
<Monfd> easel: How would you defend the claim it is "aberrant", given the theory of evolution?
easel
We create a new set of victims, paedophiles, who are demonised because they are stigmatised and to difficult to redeem, regardless of the fact that quasi-paedophillic expressions permeate culture.
noumenon
enjoy
Monfd
noumenon: "Natural law" isn't a thing.
noumenon
Monfd: wrong
noumenon
it is a "thing"
Monfd
noumenon: So, to be clear, you feel asking a question is "justifying"?
noumenon
yes, asking the question in that manner, clearly
Monfd
noumenon: Asking questions to challenge, destroy, and strengthen views has been a Greek practice for at least 2400 years.
noumenon
not something I feel, it's obvious to anyone with two eyes and a brain
Monfd
You'll recall Socrates built his entire practice off of asking questions.
Qlyde has left IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
noumenon
Monfd: depends entirely on the question
Monfd
noumenon: What does it mean to you for a person to 'justify' something?
noumenon
asking a question like Kestlah does, "what type of pedophile are you?", is not meant to challenge, destroy, or strengthen any view
Monfd
I can tell you what my view on this is, instead of you guessing it.
noumenon
it's meant as empty rhetorics
Monfd
noumenon: Socrates addressed this.
Monfd
Kestlah's question was sophist, mine was philosophic.
Monfd
It seems more productive to just give you what I think.
noumenon
Kestlah sounds like someone with pedophilia, projecting it onto others
Monfd
Rather than you guessing.
Monfd
I think the existence of pedophilia is an amoral phenomenon.
noumenon
I know for a fact that it is
Monfd
I think morality is a set of constraints and recommendations for behavior and thinking for self-referencing beings.
Monfd
Evolution is not a self-aware, self-referencing being.
Monfd
Evolution does not fear morality.
Monfd
feature*
Monfd
Humans acting or not acting on pedophiliac impulses can have a moral quality.
noumenon
no reason you're confused
noumenon
no wonder*
Monfd
noumenon: Kestlah is not capable of meaningful analysis on this topic.
noumenon
obviously not
Monfd
Pedophilia is not a complex topic.
noumenon
based on the conversation previous to this, Kestlah seemed lacking in several aspects of intelligence
noumenon
agreed
noumenon
it's just aberrant behavior, based in ignorance
Monfd
1. The goal of moral beings is to be truthful and avoid harm generation for beings which can experience harm
Monfd
2. Sexuality activity, like any activity, can generate harm
Monfd
3. One of the primary modifiers of harm in regards to sexual behavior is consent
Monfd
4. Sexual impulses of the pedophile have no special moral qualities compared to other impulses
Monfd
5. Pedophiliac impulses are in some ways more harmful, and in some ways less harmful, than impulses experienced by humans across typical functioning
noumenon
not the sexual impulse itself, but its direction towards prepubescent children is amoral
Monfd
Example: The general tribalistic impulse is more harmful than pedophilia
Monfd
Amoral?
noumenon
immoral*
Monfd
noumenon: I reject the age of consent construct, which I recognize is mere legal tool that is sometimes helpful
Monfd
I do think that humans of relatively young ages can consent at some rate above zero, but in many cases they are not consenting
noumenon
yes, any age of consent is a deference to authority, i.e. a logical fallacy
Monfd
In those cases, harm is occurring at least some of the time, and so those times can be categorized as immoral in my view, yes
Monfd
The age of consent construct is anti-scientific and anti-intellectual
Monfd
It directly violates obvious notions about humanity
Monfd
For example, variable IQ, variable emotional awareness, etc.
noumenon
based on your earlier descriptions of science, you're making the same logical fallacy when describing science
easel
There is a lineage of paedophillia throughout history, to deny this is to deny basic facts that are proven again and again, on one hand we have the cultural expressions on the other the biologic expressions, we are left squarely in the middle, the problem perhaps not complex but intractable. The greeks practiced something like paedophillia, primitive tribes practiced it, it is still practiced in places like papua new guinea, in a
easel
ritualised form. This is our predicament.
Monfd
easel: Eating turkeys is more wrong than child sex
easel
Some will be harmed by paedophillic acts, others will not, why?
noumenon
fr33d0g: no
Monfd
easel: Prepubescent children can probably consent to sexual activity in at least some cases
Monfd
That may address part of the issue
noumenon
we both agree that it's aberrant behavior and extremely immoral
Monfd
It's been shown -- Rind et al -- that harm is not universal in such acts.
noumenon
ok, maybe not him, but in my eyes it's clearly immoral
Monfd
Again, the systematic eating of animals is far more immoral than child rape.
Monfd
noumenon: I'm a Buddhist vegetarian.
Monfd
I am one of the most moral beings in this channel.
easel
We do not wish to accept the sexualisation of children, due to our cultural constraints and ideologies based on purity.
noumenon
disagree strongly; eating animals and using them for products is indeed highly immoral, but not nearly as immoral as child rape
Monfd
I just also happen to be an extremely intelligent philosopher and I have transcended most human moral norms.
noumenon
Monfd: I'm a vegan; buddhist, hinduist, practitioner of kabbalah, greek, roman, and norse mythology, and a scientist
noumenon
nice to meet you
Monfd
:)
Monfd
That's pretty impressive.
easel
The highest taboo in the west, indeed the USA is paedophillia, there are few taboos left. And yet somebody like britney spears proves the exception to the rule.
noumenon
you eat animal products?
easel
:D
Monfd
Nice to meet you, too.
noumenon
you know dairy products are orders of magnitude more immoral than meat, right?
Monfd
noumenon: I'm transiting to veganism, but I'm not there yet.
Monfd
transitioning*
Monfd
noumenon: Why?
noumenon
eggs are the least offensive, but still extremely immoral
noumenon
rofl, why?
Monfd
noumenon: I am quite immoral for consuming dairy, yes.
Monfd
But I currently conceptualize it as less than eating animal parts.
Monfd
easel: Humans are dumb.
Monfd
Really, really dumb.
Monfd
They have no perspective on almost anything.
noumenon
continuous insemination of dairy cows, separating them from calves at birth, immediately slaughtering most of the calves, the very notion of keeping animals to have them produce stuff for us
noumenon
at least there are ways of producing meat which are reasonably humane (minus the suddenly terminating their life part)
Monfd
You are right.
easel
Well if we cannot put morality in its correct place we are left to flounder, to fishtale back and forth, we are always at the risk of being exposed to our own hypocrisies and the world will certainly accomplish this in our interactions with it.
Monfd
I have stopped drinking cow's milk, but I still consume it when it's in things like baked goods.
Monfd
easel: I'd like to cite you something from Buddhism.
Monfd
Before I do that, I'll remind you of this: The average person is not capable of creating a theory of ethics and meaningfully exploring the space independent of self-concerns.
noumenon
easel: I predict pedophilia will become part of the LBGTQ letters at some point
Monfd
Almost all ethical talk by the average humans is basically social posturing and clarifying of basic social norms.
noumenon
LGBTQP
noumenon
people are that fucked up
easel
The problem lies in the differences in development between individuals, certain people are more or less 'developed'. Some females are childlike others are less so, is it wrong to engage in intercourse with an emotionally immature and yet biologically ready individual? Is this akin to rape or is it something else?
Monfd
I think this Buddhist view on sexual ethics is very appropriate here:
Monfd
There is, in the Buddhist view, nothing uniquely wicked about sexual offenses or failings. Those inclined to develop a guilt-complex about their sex-life should realize that failure in this respect is neither more, nor, on the other hand, less serious than failure to live up to any other precept. In point of fact, the most difficult precept of all for nearly everybody to live up to is the fourth — to refrain from all for
Monfd
ms of wrong speech (which often includes uncharitable comments on other people's real or alleged sexual failings!)...What precisely, then, does the Third Precept imply for the ordinary lay Buddhist? Firstly, in common with all the other precepts, it is a rule of training. It is not a "commandment" from God, the Buddha, or anyone else saying: "Thou shalt not..."
Monfd
There are no such commandments in Buddhism. It is an undertaking by you to yourself, to do your best to observe a certain type of restraint, because you understand that it is a good thing to do. This must be clearly understood. If you don't think it is a good thing to do, you should not undertake it. If you do think it is a good thing to do, but doubt your ability to keep it, you should do your best, and probably, you can
Monfd
get some help and instruction to make it easier. If you feel it is a good thing to attempt to tread the Buddhist path, you may undertake this and the other precepts, with sincerity, in this spirit.[2]
Monfd
Pedophilia has no unique moral qualities.
Monfd
It's just another human thing.
easel
It is an essential characterisation of what neurosis really is.
Monfd
It can harm people, just as regular speaking can harm people.
easel
We cannot escape it.
Monfd
It can harm people, just like voting for the GOP can harm people.
Monfd
It can harm people, just like climate change can harm people.
Monfd
easel: It is okay to have sex with humans at varying ages, in at least some cases.
Monfd
This is obviously true.
Monfd
It's hard to know exactly when that is, though.
Monfd
Age of consent constructs are obviously false.
easel
The taboos that are most essential to human development are the taboos that remain, the others can be transcended, can be deconstructed. Yet still we live in the hinterland of sexual morality with this as the ready to hand expression of our dillemma.
Monfd
easel: We're a stupid species.
Monfd
We worry more about pedophilia than climate change.
Monfd
We're morons acting out million-year old code.
Monfd
And it's going to kill us.
easel
Because there is a cultural element. There is love and there is power. We keep skewing, into onesideness.
Monfd
noumenon: I will work harder to stop consuming dairy. :)
Monfd
I'm really close.
easel
Monfd, yes. We cannot escape our shadowy history.
easel
In the east the age of consent is more likely to be 13 or even 12, in the west it is 16 or even 18. This is notable.
Monfd
I don't support age of consent constructs.
Monfd
They seem to violate the foundations of Western law.
noumenon
all law in the West as currently practiced violates its own foundations
Monfd
What are the foundations of Western law? Harm and presumption of innocence are two foundations.
Monfd
Age of consent constructs codifies in the general case when harm occurs without having to investigate particulars -- this necessarily results in worse assessments of harm -- while saving court resources.
noumenon
the foundations of Western law is natural law
Monfd
Saving court resources which work against presumption of harm are invalid.
Monfd
noumenon: Can you develop that point of view?
noumenon
I can, or you can just read this book about it, which I will promptly deliver a couple of quotes from: http://bastiat.org/en/the_law.html
noumenon
"Life, faculties, production — in other words, individuality, liberty, property — this is man. And in spite of the cunning of artful political leaders, these three gifts from God precede all human legislation, and are superior to it. Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the fi
noumenon
rst place."
noumenon
main point: "What, then, is law? It is the collective organization of the individual right to lawful defense."
noumenon
if you don't like the term "God", replace it with "nature" or "the universe"
Monfd
easel: When there is an allegation of sexual activity between two humans with sufficient evidence harm occurred, there should be an indictment with an opportunity for a defense. I am fine with usage of age as a type of prior evidence to warrant an indictment/investigation, but not a conviction.
Monfd
Conviction should always be dependent on the demonstration of harm *in this case*.
Monfd
noumenon: Interesting. That's a very Lockean viewpoint.
Monfd
I am okay with a phrase like 'natural law' by pointing out that it's referencing default human psychological patterns.
noumenon
disagree; it's pointing out the very basis of reality
scones has joined (~puree@80.233.43.182)
Monfd
For example, if you cross the border of a human group repeatedly, at close enough range, many human groups will destroy that invader.
Monfd
noumenon: By 'very basis of reality', it seems you're leveraging theism.
easel
But it is another falsity to invoke 'God' to justify a construct such as 'natural law', clearly there are Biological Causes, but they do not equate to moral law. This 'God' is lazy and incoherent to the varieties of conception of what God could actually be. Let alone to the adaptive and relative expressions of nature. Who is paedophillia ok for and in what sense? If we reduce it back to nature and hold 'God' accountable we deny
easel
'Civilisation' and human freedom and development, we are left inconclusive with no compass and no orientation.
noumenon
call it whatever you want, some call it God, some call it nature, some call it the universe, some call it reality
Monfd
Theism is merely part of the default human psychological patterns.
noumenon
I'd say the most accurate term for it is mind
Monfd
Believing that theism exists outside of human psychology is an attempt to give that range of the human mental experience pre-eminence over other mental dispositions.
noumenon
I don't believe in anything
noumenon
I'm a jnana yogi
Monfd
Interesting.
easel
The God of the Jews is not the God of the primitives, not at all and it is a magicians trick, a greedy conflation to equate the too. We are too eager for something simple, to eager to dispense with it before we have given it its due.
noumenon
what I know, I know; what I don't know, I don't know
noumenon
belief is the enemy of knowing
easel
Why do the men of the tribe get to pick the golden apples of the tree of knowledge over the subordinates?
Monfd
I think a study of human cultures demonstrates there are patterns of human thought and social organization. It makes senses to recognize that as the basis out of which civilization is attempting to improve.
Monfd
For example, in American law, you cannot kill the president. However, pre-civilization, there are no presidents and Donald Trump is 'just a man'.
noumenon
Monfd: yes, some are in accordance with natural law, others are not; recognizing which is which is the basis for improvement
Monfd
Pre-civilization any 'just a man' can be killed for sufficiently violating some patterns of human social organization.
montaigne has changed mode: +im
Monfd
When Donald Trump sufficiently deviates from the ideal of the president in American law, he loses the protections of American law and we can expect humans to revert back to 'the old ways'.
b30wulf has set topic: :)
Monfd
Here's something that scares some Americans:
Monfd
The entire American society is merely an object of study in the worldview of a philosopher
montaigne has changed mode: -im
sunsea has left ()
Monfd
Therefore, any rules in that American society are subordinate to the rules of knowledge in the worldview of the philosopher
Monfd
Therefore, no rules in the American society can -- merely because they're of high rank in that system -- be sufficient to prohibit any philosophical activity on the American system
noumenon
itea: no, because I favor knowledge over belief; you can't make me believe anything, I simply know what I know, and know what I don't know
noumenon
also, calling someone a 12 year old sounds more like a projection than anything else
Monfd
Of course, as the American system was generated by human minds, all of its rules are 'tries' as to good practice, and so they are to be considered by the philosopher
noumenon
what are you, 5 year old?
Monfd
In this way, the philosopher is essentially stateless
noumenon
fr33d0g: is that statement confusing?
noumenon
i.e. if you ask me something, I know whether or not I can give a truthful reply, or whether I don't know the answer
Monfd
This is why I will discuss when it is appropriate to kill the US president -- that role has no special qualities to the philosopher
noumenon
itea: that's not how I interpret his arguments at all
fr33d0g
no, just stating that in general,, quite a few here dont know what they dont know
Monfd
This view of the philosopher superordinate to the state is scary for the typical agent of the state
Monfd
They can only perceive such a person as uncontrollable threat to the state
Monfd
What should we desire of states, then?
noumenon
for them to cease existing
Monfd
We should desire that they aim for maximum congruence with truth and justice, and in so much as they deviate from those ideals, we should desire the state to evolve, have its commandments ignored, or for that state to dissolve
fr33d0g
you know , noumenon, the whole dunning-kruger effect, not confusing at at all, and admirable
Monfd
There is no ideal of the American state which represses the philosopher critiquing the structure of the American state
Monfd
The killing of the sovereign is a natural problem that will and has occurred in many polities which have featured a sovereign
Monfd
There are two options available to address this problem:
Monfd
1. Some or all people in the society should organize the rules upon which the sovereign should be killed
noumenon
fr33d0g: yes, most people tend to make statements based on opinion and belief
Monfd
2. Nobody discusses when, and the event will simply occur when humans are insufficiently controlled, or from the mindless portions of our human experience
Monfd
(2) is wrong because history has demonstrate that the mindful discussion of phenomena leads to superior outcomes than when we make decisions in chaos and uncontrolled states
Monfd
Therefore, advocacy for (2) makes the American state less stable
Monfd
Therefore, at least some people should discuss criteria for killing the sovereign. I am a person capable of doing this
Monfd
https://freefromharm.org/dairyfacts/
tumble has joined (uid316451@stonehaven.irccloud.com)
Monfd
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kheeL7qcYPY

Monfd
noumenon: I will try my vary hardest to not participate in this cruel behavior any longer.
noumenon
do or do not; there is no try
Monfd
I don't fully agree, but it's a useful tool :)
faras has joined (uid330149@id-330149.highgate.irccloud.com)
Monfd
Maintaining our mind to a standard can be difficult work, and we can be closer or further from our goal