|
Araenna posted:Yeah we're all the IOSM arguing about a 20 year old video game. Let's instead take a dive into the world of r/gendercritical I love people whose lives are so not controlled by gender politics, but they can't avoid getting upset about perceived slights in everyday poo poo. And they're almost invariably the same types of people who complain about "snowflakes' getting "triggered". Push El Burrito posted:The only good video game was Donkey Kong Country. Donkey Kong Country 2 was better anyway.
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 14:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 22:09 |
|
|
Well, I would too! What a terrorist, querying me as to my unassailable assertion!!!
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 14:45
|
|
|
SpacePig posted:I love people whose lives are so not controlled by gender politics, but they can't avoid getting upset about perceived slights in everyday poo poo. And they're almost invariably the same types of people who complain about "snowflakes' getting "triggered". Sure, but if you don’t like Donkey Kong Country, you’re stupid.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 14:50
|
|
|
Tiberius Thyben posted:Sure, but if you don’t like Donkey Kong Country, you’re stupid. I actually really dislike how it controls, fight me. Also barrel cannon levels can go to hell
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 14:53
|
|
|
Tiberius Thyben posted:Sure, but if you don’t like Donkey Kong Country, you’re stupid. I hope they make a modern sequel where Donkey Kong has breast cancer.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 14:56
|
|
|
Tardcore posted:I actually really dislike how it controls, fight me. Also barrel cannon levels can go to hell This is actually part of why 2 is better. The controls are improved and the backgrounds are a bit brighter and less muddy. Diddy moves quickly but responsively, and Dixie is a bit friendlier to people that are bad at platforming because she falls slower, and if you're good with both of them, those abilities help you find secret stuff. Can't say the removed barrel cannon levels, but I don't mind them personally.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 14:56
|
|
|
Poops Mcgoots posted:It's cause they're lovely people who can't possibly fathom being even slightly decent without ulterior motives. I kind of feel like anything that isn't concrete kindness to concrete people is questionable, and even then if it involves anything showy or presumptuous (like social media) it's questionable. Doesn't mean it's not kindness, it's just questionable, since there are conceivable benefits to be obtained by the person doing the act. Such as people defending them from anyone who would dare question them.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 15:09
|
|
|
Tiresias2 posted:I kind of feel like anything that isn't concrete kindness to concrete people is questionable, and even then if it involves anything showy or presumptuous (like social media) it's questionable. Doesn't mean it's not kindness, it's just questionable, since there are conceivable benefits to be obtained by the person doing the act. Such as people defending them from anyone who would dare question them. Please tell us more about the questionable motives behind expressing wanting to play as a woman in a video game, as well as the conceivable benefits to be obtained by the person doing the act.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 15:13
|
|
|
Son of Thunderbeast posted:Please tell us more about the questionable motives behind expressing wanting to play as a woman in a video game, as well as the conceivable benefits to be obtained by the person doing the act. Ingratiation with a group.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 15:15
|
|
|
Tiberius Thyben posted:Sure, but if you don’t like Donkey Kong Country, you’re stupid. I know that's insulting, but it's true.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 15:17
|
|
|
Tiresias2 posted:I kind of feel like anything that isn't concrete kindness to concrete people is questionable, and even then if it involves anything showy or presumptuous (like social media) it's questionable. Doesn't mean it's not kindness, it's just questionable, since there are conceivable benefits to be obtained by the person doing the act. Such as people defending them from anyone who would dare question them. Every act has a benefit to the doer, be it an increase in a feeling of self-worth, increased standing in a desirable social group, or physical and material gains. Your point is stupid, you're stupid, and you should feel bad.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 15:18
|
|
|
Tiresias2 posted:Ingratiation with a group. This'll be good. 
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 15:18
|
|
|
Tiresias2 posted:Ingratiation with a group. Tiresias2 posted:I kind of feel like anything that isn't concrete kindness to concrete people is questionable, and even then if it involves anything showy or presumptuous (like social media) it's questionable. Doesn't mean it's not kindness, it's just questionable, since there are conceivable benefits to be obtained by the person doing the act. Such as people defending them from anyone who would dare question them.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 15:22
|
|
|
Bunni-kat posted:Every act has a benefit to the doer, be it an increase in a feeling of self-worth, increased standing in a desirable social group, or physical and material gains. Your point is stupid, you're stupid, and you should feel bad. Excepting self-harm. You mean every act that is beneficial to others is beneficial to the doer? In that sense it's a good point, but, I'd maintain, questionable. Serious question: Is there no such thing as selfless disinterest? What does that even mean? For example, a given person might do something with no thought to themselves and yet still accrue benefits to themselves for doing so. They might also commit some act with no thought to themselves and accrue no benefit from doing so. Yet, how can we know unless we couldn't possibly know of the act's existence, and that the kind of act committed is not such that could lead to any kind of material, mental or social benefit? Is such an act even conceivable?
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 15:25
|
|
|
So who are you ingratiating yourself with right now?
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 15:27
|
|
|
Son of Thunderbeast posted:So who are you ingratiating yourself with right now? The types of douchebags who accuse people of virtue signalling, clearly
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 15:28
|
|
|
Son of Thunderbeast posted:So who are you ingratiating yourself with right now? It's conceivable that with you guys, and with anyone that reads this thread. However, I can't read your mind(s).
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 15:30
|
|
|
Tiresias2 posted:Excepting self-harm. You mean every act that is beneficial to others is beneficial to the doer? Tiresias2 posted:It's conceivable that with you guys, and with anyone that reads this thread. However, I can't read your mind(s).
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 15:30
|
|
|
Ravenfood posted:But congratulations, I was maybe 13 when I came up with the idea that altruism doesn't exist. It took a whole two years for me to get over that one, so maybe you'll get there some day sweetie. I have a 30+ year old acquaintance who thinks all charity is stupid because it makes the charitable feel good, it's embarrassingly stupid when he brings it up. I'm not sure how people miss the mark by such a wide margin.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 15:31
|
|
|
Tiberius Thyben posted:Sure, but if you don’t like Donkey Kong Country, you’re stupid. If the next Donkey Kong Country doesn't have voice acting, I'm going to commit suicide.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 15:32
|
|
|
SpacePig posted:This is actually part of why 2 is better. The controls are improved and the backgrounds are a bit brighter and less muddy. Diddy moves quickly but responsively, and Dixie is a bit friendlier to people that are bad at platforming because she falls slower, and if you're good with both of them, those abilities help you find secret stuff. Can't say the removed barrel cannon levels, but I don't mind them personally. So what you're telling me is you're not good enough to get through DK1 and defeat King K. Rool so you go with the watered down baby version with bright colors? Sorry, this is the real world, when your banana hoard is stolen you need to buckle down and get it back by any means necessary.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 15:36
|
|
|
Ravenfood posted:Self-harm can provide emotional benefits to the person doing them. That their cost/benefit analyses aren't congruous with others' doesn't change that fact. That too is interesting. Though it seems counter to the notion of 'self-harm' in a literal or absolute sense. It is conceivable, though I do not perceive any such intention in my mind. It seems likely that wanting people who are rude to me to like me would consist in 'people-pleasing', which is undesirable to me at this moment. That said, what I call "rudeness" or personal remarks, seems to be an essential factor in this discussion, so in order for it to continue with any purpose I propose we discuss what constitutes "defending someone", as opposed to debating an idea for example, and what a "douchebag" is.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 15:39
|
|
|
Altruism is an evolutionary advantage to any social animal. The smartest sociopaths figure out that even if they don't personally care about other people, if they act like they do then the group will reward them, but it goes beyond personal reward. Altruistic behaviour benefits the group as a whole, increasing survivability and happiness for everyone. If the group is strong and you've helped when you could, you'll have support when you need it. If you don't play along with the social rules for niceness, people will eventually exclude you. I recall reading a study that was done with rats. A rat was presented with two doors that could only be opened from their side. Behind one was a pile of chocolate chips, and behind the other was a trapped rat (variable: known to them or a stranger). They could see/smell/hear what was behind each door. The choice presented is simple: rescue the other rat first and share the delicious treat, or eat all the chocolate themselves and then save the other rat, or not at all. Overwhelmingly, the rats generally chose to help the other rats first, less often if it was a stranger, even if they themselves got less chocolate as a result. Rats are very social, and the strength of the colony is important. And if you can't grasp this, you are dumber and more of an rear end in a top hat than a rat. (But I like rats.)
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 15:39
|
|
|
Push El Burrito posted:So what you're telling me is you're not good enough to get through DK1 and defeat King K. Rool so you go with the watered down baby version with bright colors? Sorry, this is the real world, when your banana hoard is stolen you need to buckle down and get it back by any means necessary. Excuse me friend, but I did not say I couldn't beat the first Donkey Kong Country. I will not stand for this slander. Just that the 2nd was better because of improved controls, and obstacles that were easier to see. Bright, baby DKC is 3, and even that is still a lot of fun. Sorry i just want people to be included in the joy of the Donkey Kong Country world.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 15:43
|
|
|
RoboRodent posted:(But I like rats.)
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 15:44
|
|
|
RoboRodent posted:Altruism is an evolutionary advantage to any social animal. The smartest sociopaths figure out that even if they don't personally care about other people, if they act like they do then the group will reward them, but it goes beyond personal reward. Altruistic behaviour benefits the group as a whole, increasing survivability and happiness for everyone. If the group is strong and you've helped when you could, you'll have support when you need it. If you don't play along with the social rules for niceness, people will eventually exclude you. I think the axis of the discussion revolves around what this "caring for people" is, or what it seems in your mind, or language, distinguishes an ordinary mind from a "sociopath" mind. I, personally, don't care for people. (Edit: By which I mean I neither seek their company, am interested in their personal lives, nor desire their aid in any given circumstance if it is at all avoidable.) But I do what it is I consider kind to others, which I do my best to critically inform through the opinions of others, if I conclude that it will be no great hindrance for me to do so. Then the debate with myself takes center around what is considered "a great hindrance", or not, which depends on a variety of factors from moment to moment, chief among them my goals in life. Tiresias2 has a new favorite as of 15:50 on May 8, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 15:45
|
|
|
theshim posted:Okay, but how do you feel about snakes? Snakes REALLY like rats. Or is it mice...
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 15:45
|
|
|
Krispy Wafer posted:Snakes REALLY like rats. Or is it mice... Snakes are good. Snakes gotta eat.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 15:47
|
|
|
Waterbed Wendy posted:I have a 30+ year old acquaintance who thinks all charity is stupid because it makes the charitable feel good, it's embarrassingly stupid when he brings it up. I'm not sure how people miss the mark by such a wide margin. Charities in practice are a way for the wealthy to alleviate their guilt. A lot of big name charities are basically scams that do the barest minimum to not be legally fraudulent, and even those that aren't spend a majority of their budget on marketing (by necessity).
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 15:48
|
|
|
Tiresias2 posted:I think the axis of the discussion revolves around what this "caring for people" is, or what it seems in your mind, or language, distinguishes an ordinary mind for a "sociopath" mind. when will you be returning to your homeworld to report on the development of our species?
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 15:49
|
|
|
Tiresias2 posted:Excepting self-harm. You mean every act that is beneficial to others is beneficial to the doer? Self-harm releases endorphens and helps the harmer feel they have a sense of control. The brain is also a gating mechanism, and physical pain can crowd out mental pain. You have no idea about philosophy, do you?
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 15:49
|
|
|
MizPiz posted:Charities in practice are a way for the wealthy to alleviate their guilt. A lot of big name charities are basically scams that do the barest minimum to not be legally fraudulent, and even those that aren't spend a majority of theor budget on marketing (by necessity). lol yeah that's a point often brought up by my acquaintance. a real gem.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 15:50
|
|
|
MizPiz posted:Charities in practice are a way for the wealthy to alleviate their guilt. A lot of big name charities are basically scams that do the barest minimum to not be legally fraudulent, and even those that aren't spend a majority of their budget on marketing (by necessity). Goodwill is an elaborate tax dodge the middle class uses to get rid of old stuff.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 15:52
|
|
|
Tiresias2 posted:I think the axis of the discussion revolves around what this "caring for people" is, or what it seems in your mind, or language, distinguishes an ordinary mind from a "sociopath" mind.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 15:52
|
|
|
Charity is bad, there should only be The State.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 15:52
|
|
|
Waterbed Wendy posted:lol yeah that's a point often brought up by my acquaintance. a real gem. So then how's he wrong?
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 15:53
|
|
|
Bunni-kat posted:Self-harm releases endorphens and helps the harmer feel they have a sense of control. The brain is also a gating mechanism, and physical pain can crowd out mental pain. My education with regards to philosophy is mostly historical in nature. Oriented towards Europe, so far, starting with the Pre-Socratics and ending in Hegel. The middle ages, late antiquity and the renaissance I know about mostly through secondary sources. I am most fond of the works that touch on subjects of skepticism and faith such as those by Sextus Empiricus, Saint Augustine, Descartes, Malebranche, David Hume and Thomas Reid. Though I am very fond of Plato and Aristotle and Kant and Hegel as well.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 15:54
|
|
|
Son of Thunderbeast posted:So who are you ingratiating yourself with right now? No no no, other people irrationally follow social hierarchies, whereas I kindly but dispassionately consider what is optimal.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 15:54
|
|
|
MizPiz posted:Charities in practice are a way for the wealthy to alleviate their guilt. A lot of big name charities are basically scams that do the barest minimum to not be legally fraudulent, and even those that aren't spend a majority of their budget on marketing (by necessity). There’s a difference between charitable organization and the act of charity itself.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 15:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 22:09 |
|
|
Tiresias2 posted:That too is interesting. Though it seems counter to the notion of 'self-harm' in a literal or absolute sense. This is the dumbest poo poo I've ever read and I feel dumber for having read it. "forsooth my good fellow what doth be "douchebag""
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2018 15:54
|
|