Avatar
freemymind 🇨🇭
b7cf9f42a796b091e843dce919d3ef4c0dc82e029452edf0bdbcdeb9ecb93e78
#daoist #voluntarist #anarchist #humanist #social #political #conversations #nonviolence How to learn my philosophy: Start with some critical thinking on youtube with "TEDed the deomon of reason" miniseries Start with Immanuel Kants techings, follow stoics, also very nice to read "happy" by Derren Brown, add dao techings to it Follow this up by Podcasts like Darknet diaries and Jon Harbinger On Youtube watch TEDx talks, Veritassium and Huberman Lab Chronically offended by The Beave 😎
Replying to Avatar Jeff Swann

It sounds kinda like you are asking how do I trust my own understanding of the world?

I tend to remember things by their relationship to each other & in my mind each peice of how I see the world needs to fit with every other peice. I don't like contradictions. Sometimes I have ideas that don't fit perfectly which I leave as place holders, or I have possibilities stacked in one area of interest, but for the most part everything has to logically fit together. In school, I never wanted to memorize all the formulas for the math test, so I would learn one or two & then just figure out how I could derive the others from the ones I already knew.

I have built houses & cars & I have designed & 3d printed all sorts of things to solve random problems, so I have a pretty good handle on how most things work based on first hand experience. Most things are just the same ideas applied over & over in slightly different ways to different areas of life.

When a good friend & I were building cars for a professional race team, the owner was concerned that we were young & so he hired an engineer to come & consult with us. But this guy, who had all the credentials, told us that a number of the very basic improvements we were working on wouldn't work. We did things our way & they worked just like we knew they would.

I was very aware from an early age that parents & teachers didn't always understand the situation when they came to stop a conflict or address a problem. Idk how anyone with a half decent awareness of the world would come to any other conclusion, because that's just reality. People who pay attention should understand that "authority figures" are just people & they are just as fallable as anyone else.

When I majored in economics with a focus on money & banking it was clear that macro & micro were contradictory. In trying to iron out the contradictions I studied MMT & found it to be more consistent, but it was also ethically insane & a bit like a castle in the sky. It was ultimately just totally disconnected from reality. Then I found the Chicago school & eventually the Austrians. The Austrians seemed to pretty much have everything worked out, but when I found Bitcoin (which fit perfectly in my mind) many of them were also wrong about that too. If I had at any time renonced or denied my own understanding in order to align myself with the larger group rather than stick to what logically fits then I would be a lot poorer.

When I developed gut issues, doing everything the doctor told me to do (which was supposedly accurate according to general consensus) made my problems significantly worse. So when the choice is between assuming they are all wrong & finding my own answers (as I have done before), or living in pain to maintain some broken idea of reality, it's really not that hard to choose. And because I looked, I found a whole bunch of doctors & people who had figured out how to solve their own problems too. Most of these people were all seperately aligned, & they had much more thorough & logical explanations than anyone else. And unlike the establishment recommendations, these people had ideas that actually worked.

So it's not that I have no trust in anything, maybe less than most people. But I recognize that the incentives which are shaping our current systems of authority are very broken. I recognize corruption for what it is & I build my own understanding of things by finding others who have done the same or by applying my own understanding & logic to a situation right by myself.

When it comes to nutrition all it really takes to understand what is natural for us, is knowing that prior to agriculture, 200+ mammal species were wiped out by human hunting practices. Wild fruit was nothing like modern fruit & would have only been available seasonally if at all. From just that we can pretty much conclude that meat had to be the primary form of sustenance. It's also worth noting that basically all cave paintings are of men hunting & probably represent early efforts to keep a record of who owes who what.

I would guess we started loosely growing things that would attract the animals we wanted to eat & then a lack of property rights over the animals probably produced tragedy of the commons like conditions in animal populations that forced us to start turning the grain into food for ourselves at times when meat was very scarce. And again, archeological records seem to show that eating grain had a detrimental impact on human health.

So when the "best verified science" doesn't match reality & the system that funds it is completely corrupt, it is pretty easy to discard. My life is infinitely better as a result of doing so both in terms of my health & my personal wealth. If you understand & believe in bitcoin, then you have already dismissed the work of nobel prize winning economists. You might as well let go of the other BS too.

Thanks for all your context. Helps me understand your reasoning. And I am sure you always find a way that works for you. You seem to be very practicle and adapt easy. All great qualities.

But maby in all the heroic ststements of ancient nutrition. I think through most times Human were as hunter gathere just a surviving species without much wealth through most time. And back then a 40 year old person was amongs the oldest. Today we have many countries with intermideat mortality above 80 years. So I assume we live healthier today then back then. A lot for sure is the better savety we have from hunger and al the hospitals that make sure a flue does not kill most people as before moderne medicine. We found ways to treat many illnesses or even bring them to extinct (or close to it). So probably quiet a bunch of general improvements are actually good. Even when I agree that health conditions are often very individual and many practicing docter do not have the time to go very deep into the problem of every pacient. So probably there is big room for improvement. Maby AI programs can help there a lot in analyzing.

#schweiz #deutsch #lernen

https://www.srf.ch/play/tv/redirect/detail/3f225d5c-76bb-4e6c-a6e8-4b2f9cb1a238

Ich finde dieses Konzept zu lernen sehr fortschrittlich. Ich habe selber nicht so gelernt. Aber wenn Lernen spass macht und man lernt seine Stärken und schwächen zu kennen, glaube ich ist das die beste vorbereitung fürs Leben. Ganz egal für welche Herausforderung.

I am not from the UK. I only got the information of the lists of targets that have been shared in right extremist circles to burn down and kill immigrants.

What do the people protest for or against, that have decent reasoning? So not promoting or acting criminal but anyways being silenced. Any footage or personal information on that?

Neighter the existance nor the inexistance can be proofen. If there is something above all natural rules is completely up to our faith.

Based on what? Sorry for the maby stupid question. What makes spammers less powerfull on noster?

I hope you know, that loosing all trust is very dangorus. In a sense, that all knowledge builds on trust. First on trust in our memory, then in our senses. After that trusting others around. And in the end one has no possibility to distrust everyone. So when you do not trust the best verified science and the mechanics of it, there is just no higher standard that can be superior.

How is it you trust Bitcoin? Probably you didn't review the code. To just distrust a conclusion, with the only reason that there could be false is nearly insane. How you then trust the theories you came up with?

I bet these sell very well now. Testet by most extreme circunstances😉

But can this story be true that these leggins survived without scratches?

Can I tell you one thing about science in general. It does actually not matter too much who finance studies or who executes them. It is important that they are peer reviewed. And can be executed the same way at any given time and place. And the results should come to the same or similar conclusion. This is how scince work. It is independent from religion belief or god.

Of course there are studies of poor quality. But those can be pointed out. Not for the autor. But by explaining the methological issues that exist with the given study.

Replying to Avatar Jeff Swann

I am not attacking you. There are people in positions of power who have been lying to everyone for many decades because it makes them money to do so. So people who take your posititon either benefit from perpetuating the lies or they are ignorant of reality. That's not an attack it is just the truth.

And idk what you look like, but if you are overweight which is the statistical norm now, while I (with very little effort) am a muscular 170lbs at 6'1" & my blood pressure is ~100/60 eating red meat with salt & 200+ grams of animal fat every day for 7+ years, wouldn't that be some indication that maybe you should rethink your position?

In human archeological records the advent of agriculture results in everyone being a foot shorter & their teeth falling out. Hunting tribes prior to agriculture were tall & healthy with dense bones & they kept all their teeth. For ~2mil years we hunted and largely avoided plants except maybe in the making of savs & medicines. In just the last couple of generations natives in parts of Australia & Africa who had still been living as hunters have been introduced to western foods & they were completely transformed from everyone being lean & healthy & strong well into their 80s, to fat & diabetic, & addicted to processed grains & softdrinks.

Again, farmers today fatten livestock by feeding them the same grains that are fattening us & making us sick.

Again, the bioavailable nutritional value of meat is far higher than plant products. I would encourage you to read the info graphic I made (tho you may have to zoom in a bit).

Shawn Baker & Kelly Hogan (from the bottom of the graphic) are good sources of info. Dr Chaffee has some great video content, Steak & Butter Gal has some great videos. Jordan Peterson's daughter cured severe rheumatoid arthritis with a diet of only red meat & water. Sugar feeds cancers because cancer (and most other serious illnesses) are the result of metabolic problems. Fat & cholesterol are needed to heal & repair cells & metabolic issues. Doctors & hospitals that are telling people to eat or feeding them sugary & veg oil filled garbage are just killing people.

You can believe whatever you want to believe, I really don't care. Your comments thus far suggest that you care more about aligning yourself with some authority or with what the herd believes (which is why I basically told you to have fun/fuck off). I think those are particularly bad heuristics for making important decisions. It is impossible to be exceptional while trying to align yourself with the average moron or the people herding them around.

W study or one person can not directly be considered represental. But I can imagine, that one can eat a lot of meat and have a healthy lifestyle. Thia is no counterargument against plantbased foods. And I would never say white bread, sugary drinks, cake and all junkfood can be considered healthy. Not say.

And over all health has more factors then just food. It is about physical activity, having a good circle of people around to have fun with and so on that have big influence on the health as well. Eating is just one big factor of the equation to health.

And for your curiosity. I am somewhere normal with a BMI around 22. But this does not give my arguments any real value. Arguments from lean people are not better nor worse in quality then the same arguments from a fat person.

The conversation seems to gain in quality it seems for me.

What you mean with again? If something is prooven means it is right. It is as easy. All premises of a theory are proofen to be true -> conclusion is logically true.

One of the premises can not be proven to be true -> no proof of truth, so it could also not be true

One of the premis is proven to be wrong -> conclusion is wrong

This was only answer to your question. My initial question was only what is your opinion on what makes a winner in a argument. Offtopic of if you or me could win or loose an argument.

I think it does not matter if it is on page one or on page 20 of an internet search. Important is if a reasearch was peerreviewed, created with scientific intent to figure out a measurable and logical explainable causality/hypothesis and proof it with real world data.

I did not know until now that even in 2024 the US government found a way to even make surveillance more invasive then before:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2024/04/us-senate-and-biden-administration-shamefully-renew-and-expand-fisa-section-702-0