@ CCL

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZfwuCjbBDk

@ Utoptia

Sorry, I tried several places but couldn't find it anywhere...
You have your eyes on some very rare stuff, I tell ya ;)
But it's not even out on DVD yet... maybe you just need a little more patience... It'll eventually show up.

Regarding your question from last night about philosophers:
I guess, I admire the first known philosophers the most because back in the day, talking about more than 2000 years ago, it was quite a different challenge than it is today and in more modern times.
People like Aristotle and Socrates... they were the foundation for progressive civilizations.
“Knowing yourself is the beginning of all wisdom”
Is one of my favorite quotes and I also find it to be so true.

I also always liked Pascals logic, I guess: “It is man's natural sickness to believe that he possesses the truth” and of course: “The more I see of Mankind, the more I prefer my dog” ^^

I'm really not an expert on philosophers, but Rosa Luxemburg was also an impressive personality, Never afraid to speak her mind in not always easy times (to say the least) ^^
“Freedom is always, and exclusively, freedom for the one who thinks differently.”
“The most revolutionary thing one can do is always to proclaim loudly what is happening.”

Can't forget Nietzsche, of course. That little rebel and pervert (^_^)v
He's probably the most interesting one from those last few centuries... and he helped quite a bit to form our modern civilization.
Of course, I also totally agree with him when he said: “Without music, life would be a mistake.”

And maybe I'll end this post with another quote by Pascal “I have only made this letter longer because I have not had the time to make it shorter” ;)

So what about you? Who are your favorites...?

last edited at Aug 27, 2016 7:28PM

I cannot help but mention one of my memories regarding Rosa Luxemburg (Polish spelling is evil)

I remember at one point me mentioning her name during a history class only to hear the teacher scream "SHE SHOULD HAVE BEEN SHOT DEAD THE MOMENT SHE CROSSED THE POLISH BORDERS!"

The again, being a left winger isn't really appreicated inside of eastern Europe (saying this as someone who really doesn't mind it), I'm guessing that people had more than enough of the horribly incompetent USSR and the communist governments.

Surprised to read read that quote from Pascal tho., especially from you out of all people. I'm guessing it might've suited my posts better? :P

Then again I'm one for team humanist, having hard time to get behind people that value human life more than animals' one.

Mandatory link that I keep forgetting to post at the right time every single week.

last edited at Aug 27, 2016 8:10PM

Coming from a teacher, I would have expected a more moderate approach. ^^
But subtlety is not for anyone, I guess... ;)
And she died soon enough anyway unfortunately...

Well... watching the news every day... seeing people repeating the same mistakes over and over again... and all of that evil in the world, it is hard to prefer all that over my dog. Whenever I look at her she just makes me happy. Can't say that about mankind as a whole.

Well... watching the news every day... seeing people repeating the same mistakes over and over again... and all of that evil in the world, it is hard to prefer all that over my dog. Whenever I look at her she just makes me happy. Can't say that about mankind as a whole.

I can see your point fully and am fairly sure that you agree with me full time, just writing it since I genuinly know a few people that would disagree with me firmly on this.

I think that valuing an animal's life over human's is pure madness. Not saying this regarding to a specific person, but the valuation of lifes is a normal part of life and the society we live in.

A good example of it would be people paramedics.. when there's an accident and there are multiple victims, they prioritise people with bigger survival chance.. it makes makes sense actually, going for someone that has an actual chance of making it.

Imho "people making the same mistakes over and over again" is not a fair assessment, just because we have free will and don't share consciousness.

Can fully understand your frustration tho., but maybe I'm just too much of a humanist.

last edited at Aug 27, 2016 8:31PM

Anon

Thanks for searching. I prolly will purcharse the two you found.
I look forward to owning Barash too, I hope I'll be able to buy/watch soon tho.

I like your point of view for the ancient philosophers. I myself really love Epicurus's philosophy (Joy before anything else, and I think Galich's "flood" was fitting his philosophy quite well, since posting here makes her feel better ;-p) , although I like all old greek philosophers. I like the quote as well. Strangely enough, he ended up getting arrested, imprisoned and poisoned, although he could have escaped...

Pascal was interesting until the moment he got into religion. Pascal also considered that animals were soulless beings, and that's something I can't get on board with. You have a beautiful little dog, you must understand my point of view. Although Pascal was really clever, he even made one of the first calculator, the pascaline. (dunno if it's the same word in english, used the french one.)

My favorites, uh. Well, in first place comes Nietzsche. I basically agree with his entire philosophy, and I myself have a nihilistic vision of life. I won't talk too much about religion here, but I share his point of view about the inexistence of God (and of any form of supernatural; I think everything on earth can be thoroughly explained with science).

I also really like Schopenhauer and Kierkegaard, basically because of their pessimistic and accurate vision of life, and their pertinent way of thinking. Schopenhauer considers life as something absurd, since there's no reason of existence but the existence itself. I completly agree with that so..

I also find Michel Foucault's philosophy very interesting, his view of sexualty. He was dark and pessimistic too, and his philosphy is basically, quoting mr Bourdieu, "a long exploration of transgression, of going beyond social limits, always inseparably linked to knowledge and power". (thanks for the english translation, wikipedia). The idea of transgression, and the quest of knowledge over the rest is basically my way of thinking so. (I'm not an anarchist tho .-.).

Guess it was a big post ? I'm glad I brought this topic tho', it's always interesting to talk about "intellectual" stuff here from time to time ;-).

last edited at Aug 27, 2016 9:40PM

I don't have a list of favorite philosophers, but some writers and thinkers that have had a large impact on me are David Nibert, Angela Davis, Laura Agustin, Mirha Soleil-Ross, Donna Haraway, and William Gillis. I also like some (not all) of Slavoj Zizek's writing.

My favorites, uh. Well, in first place comes Nietzsche. I basically agree with his entire philosophy, and I myself have a nihilistic vision of life.

I see Nietzsche as more of a critic of nihilism. The loss of religious faith leads to nihilism, but after that loss, you have the chance to make your own meaning. IMHO, he was an optimistic philosopher who saw opportunity in disillusionment.

last edited at Aug 27, 2016 9:21PM

@Suosiki

I didnt say that Nietzsche was pessimistic. I liked his reflection on religion, and the idea of humans being responsible of their own destiny is really pertinent and I firmly believe that. I said that I have a pessimistic vision of life. Saying he wasn't nihilistic is, from my point of view, wrong. Basically nihilism states that existence is meaningless, but it doesn't imply that we shouldn't try to improve our lives for all that, even if it denies moral values. Nietzsche wasn't cleary as pessimistic as he looked, and I'd rather consider him optimistic too, but saying that he wasn't nihilistic seems inaccurate to me. He clearly was at least a little bit nihilistic. I totally agree with the rest of your post tho'.

That said, I tend to avoid manicheism, I don't think humans are evil or good. I think they are .. moldable ? That everything depends of the education and of the valors you will inculcate them.

last edited at Aug 27, 2016 9:53PM

@ SF

I thought that maybe you used one of those mix and mash programs... ^^

Nope XD

I think that valuing an animal's life over human's is pure madness. Not saying this regarding to a specific person, but the valuation of lifes is a normal part of life and the society we live in.

Tbh, sometimes I think the life of an animal is more valuable than a human's; like the whole Harambe incident, I couldn't give any much more of a care if the child died considering their parents were neglectful enough to leave them roaming around, but yet I'm not pleased with the fact that the animal got shot down. Still, it really depends on what kind of human I am dealing with, I'd rather save a cat over a Trump supporter for example, but I'd alao rather save a fellow LGBT member over a dog.

Well... watching the news every day... seeing people repeating the same mistakes over and over again... and all of that evil in the world, it is hard to prefer all that over my dog. Whenever I look at her she just makes me happy. Can't say that about mankind as a whole.

I agree with your point, it's hilarious and sad to see ppl going back into the same pitfalls that others made in history, makes you question why is history even being taught when only 20% of humanity have the brains to not repeat it. Still, if the 2 6 2 rule is applied here, technically only 20% of humanity is downright stupid, the remaining 60% are just following wherever the wind points them to.

---

On the topic of philiosophy, I don't really have anyone that I truely adhere to or follow, in fact I usually just live by some quotes in life that I feel resonates with me; ie

"There is almost nothing in this world that is absolute"
"Everything that occurs in life - both good and bad - should be used to forge oneself, to better oneself."
"There are only actions and consequences."

I'm a bit of a nihilist in that I find morality to be a pointless mechanism created by humans to quantify what they can't comprehend; the terms "good" and "evil" are so contradicting and self-serving in most cases that I honestly don't agree with them, I'd rather believe that everything in this world, in one way or another, revolves around actions and consequences - even right now, I think a lot of things happening in the world are just a string of consequences set off by a significant past action, and that with a given action significant enough to offset the last one, a new string of consequences that can lead to a better future will fall in place.

last edited at Aug 28, 2016 1:32AM

Still, it really depends on what kind of human I am dealing with, I'd rather save a cat over a Trump supporter for example, but I'd alao rather save a fellow LGBT member over a dog.

What about someone who is neither a Trump supporter nor a fellow LGBT, would you save them over a dog/cat?

I'm a bit of a nihilist in that I find morality to be a pointless mechanism created by humans to quantify what they can't comprehend; the terms "good" and "evil" are so contradicting and self-serving in most cases that I honestly don't agree with them, I'd rather believe that everything in this world, in one way or another, revolves around actions and consequences - even right now, I think a lot of things happening in the world are just a string of consequences set off by a significant past action, and that with a given action significant enough to offset the last one, a new string of consequences that can lead to a better future will fall in place.

Well, I don't believe in inherently good or evil people. Someone might be a sociopath or psychopath, and do horrible things because of that, but that doesn't make them evil. It makes them a person who does horrible things, no more, no less. And society plays a large part in determining what a person becomes, so if we live in a culture that rewards sociopathy, we'll have more sociopaths.

I do believe in good and evil actions, though. In my view, good actions are ones that increase agency, or prevent harm. Those who cause harm to others, or take away their agency, in order to serve their own interests are doing something that can be called evil.

We can argue about selfishness vs. altruism, and whether we should help others before ourselves... I don't believe in hard rules like "live for others", "live for yourself", or "live for community", because different people will have wildly different ideas about what a good life consists of. Still, I believe that we all should do something for others, even if it's just creating beautiful art to inspire people. I do think there is a collective good.

I think that valuing an animal's life over human's is pure madness. Not saying this regarding to a specific person, but the valuation of lifes is a normal part of life and the society we live in.

Tbh, sometimes I think the life of an animal is more valuable than a human's; like the whole Harambe incident, I couldn't give any much more of a care if the child died considering their parents were neglectful enough to leave them roaming around, but yet I'm not pleased with the fact that the animal got shot down. Still, it really depends on what kind of human I am dealing with, I'd rather save a cat over a Trump supporter for example, but I'd also rather save a fellow LGBT member over a dog.

I disagree. And in all of those cases, I'd try to save both.

That LGBT person might want to risk their own life to save a dog. And that Trump supporter might be doing so out of genuine concern about the Democratic candidate's actions (e.g. in Honduras and Libya) and sincere belief that Trump is the lesser of two evils.

Also, what do you do in the case of an LGBT Trump supporter? j/k

More importantly, though, everyone's life is equally valuable to themselves, and should be protected whatever our own feelings might be.

Related.

last edited at Aug 28, 2016 3:54AM

@Oliver I would save them, I don't see a reason not to :/

last edited at Aug 28, 2016 3:54AM

Hah that's a serious topic to start your day with...
and I personally don't like those kinds of philosophical questions where you should choose over one or the other..

As far as I'm concerned, I would try saving both because I'm not to decide who lives and who doesn't, and I can't stand seeing one's suffering...
But if the situation demands a choice to be made, I will always save the human - he has the ability to reason. So through the act of saving him I might change the way he see things, plus there is greater possibility for a human to save other humans..
Too early for philosophical musings... I need a coffee..

@Rina
I was curious because you missed that part. Tbh, I can understand why people value human lives more important than animals', or the other way around, but I really don't understand when human's political beliefs/gender/sexuality can play the role in.

@Suosiki
I believe everyone would try to save both, but "who first?" is the question.

last edited at Aug 28, 2016 4:36AM

Agreed with oliver on this point. I do not think that judging someone over their political views etc. when it comes to valuing their life is the way to go.

Sure, one can believe that an animal's life is more valuable, but people most often than not don't cause evil for the sake of causing evil: they do it due to not realising what they're actually doing.

It's very rare to see to see people cause evil for the sake of causing evil.

On a side note, didnt know I'd be triggering such a discussion here. Not saying it as a bad thing.

@Rina
I was curious because you missed that part. Tbh, I can understand why people value human lives more important than animals', or the other way around, but I really don't understand when human's political beliefs/gender/sexuality can play the role in.

Tis' just an example, sort of a gauge for me to see if someone is worth saving; personally I've very little concern for anyone that supports Trump considering most of them I've seen are genuine jerks.

But that is to say, the examples are not something that I adhere to strictly, I wouldn't save any of those "anti-feminism" ppl on the internet regardless of their orientation or gender for example, conversely I would save a LGBT Trump Supporter if their reasons for supporting him isn't grounded in the stupid stuff that he says but out of misguided belief that he'll actually do something good.

Really for me it's just a matter of what I think is more detrimental as a whole. No point in saving someone if they're just going to add to the garbage of society.

last edited at Aug 28, 2016 6:19AM

@ Blackkitty

I'm late – again! (^_^”) Sorry, but I was really tired last night... didn't manage to get to you anymore...

(^_-)v If I ever open up a bar or a club, I'm gonna name it Homolulu as well ^^
Here's another one of her characters:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eU9HSgHaZ24
I wanna be like that too when I grow old ;)

Your definition of cute really is strange ^^
Don't you see the serious issues I'm facing...? O_o And you think that's cute...? (◦’ںˉ◦)

Well... I think I had the same experience with my father. I know him, we lived with him for a while but he was never like a real father to me... So I guess I can relate.

A little chocolate every now and then can't hurt! :)
I'm one of the few lucky who can eat as much chocolate as they want without gaining weight. Chocolate and ice cream. But I'm not really a big fan of ice. I rarely eat it. But there was a time when I ate a whole bar of chocolate a day. Didn't gain a single gram... But that only goes for pure chocolate. I can't eat those candy bars with different fillings or cookies. Those make me gain weight easily too. Don't know why. But I don't mind ;)

I also like her voice very much it's just a shame that she doesn't have a lot of songs...

(I read everything you post! ^^)

Awww... I'm so sorry to hear that. Losing a beloved pet is horrible. T_T

And to end this on a lighter note:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LoP-YTjN7PA
;)

@ SF

You never know ;)
There are some really talented people here on Dynasty after all... ^^b

So... how are you holding up on your end...? (`･ω･´)
Where are you from by the way...?

@ Galich

Imho "people making the same mistakes over and over again" is not a fair assessment, just because we have free will and don't share consciousness.

True but if mankind is unable to learn from past mistakes of previous generations then there's no reason for history books other than pure entertainment...
I'm willing to cut some slack on individuals but not always on the masses.

@ Utoptia

Let us know how you liked those movies when you've seen them.

I'm quite the hedonist myself so I can relate (and I'm glad that Galich enjoys this thread so much, I'm just trying to advocate some equal rights here ;P)

Regarding Pascal:
There's nothing wrong with concerning oneself with religion but he still always kept his logical approach to it (as far as I know). Whether we like it or not religion is a big part of humankind and their history. It influences people, even those opposed to it.
“The eternal silence of these infinite spaces terrifies me” That might have been the cause of his interest in religion.
And Pascal always believed that only the interaction of mind/intellect and heart/soul can be the foundation of a thorough human insight and comprehension. There's certainly some truth to that.
I don't know if or in which context he referred to animals as "soulless creatures" but since people had a totally different view of animals back in the day, I'd be willing to cut him some slack here, even though I really don't agree with this point of view.
But I also know that he said this:
“It is dangerous to explain too clearly to man how like he is to the animals without pointing out his greatness. It is also dangerous to make too much of his greatness without his vileness. It is still more dangerous to leave him in ignorance of both, but it is most valuable to represent both to him.
Man must not be allowed to believe that he is equal either to animals or to angels, nor to be unaware of either, but he must know both.”
And a quote of his that you might like:
“Lust is the source of all our actions, and humanity.”
Also Nietzsche paid a lot of attention to Pascal, as far as I know.

Please explain to me what caused the big bang to happen... and what was before that. Scientifically. I was always wondering about that... ;)
I'm just kidding, of course ^^

Unfortunately I can relate to Schopenhauer's view of life as well... T_T

(You clearly have some anarchistic vibes sometimes though ;) )

Don't mind big posts ^^ You can't discuss serious things with just one or two sentences...
But nonetheless, sorry for those two wallposts... (^_^")

@ SF

You never know ;)
There are some really talented people here on Dynasty after all... ^^b

So... how are you holding up on your end...? (`･ω･´)
Where are you from by the way...?

Im from New York, Thats the only personal info I'll give out :P. And yeah, Im holding up pretty good.

Sounds like we have a few Char Aznables (from CCA) here.

We make mistakes and we repeat them, both on a small scale and a massive scale. Not everyone learns from their mistakes, some people do, while others do not or are unable to.

Here is my personal experience that makes made me who I am. I lied to my parents quite a lot when I was in college. And repeated the same mistake (cutting classes) for almost 3 semesters. I was telling them I was going to classes everything was fine and even tried to doctor my end of semester grades to make it look like I did go to class and did not get grades that show I did not. After the first time, I said I would not do it again, but I did it again. After the second time I said I would not do it again but I did again. Then I was doing it for a third time, but this time I was stronger and able to turn it around and stop. For over a year I told my parents I was going to classes but I did not and I wasted a lot of their money. They gave me another chance each time and I turned it around.

This is why I believe in humanity and people. I was given so many chances. Some people might need more chances than I needed to turn something around. Not everyone will make the best choice or learn from their mistakes, but I am not one to judge them. I am just another human being with my own problems and they have their own problems as well. If someone needs help, I will help them as best as I can. I try hard not to judge people because there are people who gave me a bad first impression but turned out to be people I enjoy spending time with and talking.

Also, I will value a human life over an animal's because a human can do so much more. Yes, more bad too, but there is that possibility of doing more good. I like to believe in possibilities because of how humans have been able to overcome hard times. Look at all the technologies we have invented. Yes there are bad ones, but there are so many good ones.

Maybe I am naive and a fool, but that's how I feel. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Edit: My avatar with Haman really does not fit this post lol

last edited at Aug 28, 2016 1:49PM

When I was in high school, my classmates went into an argument, "If you were seeing a near-death murderer, would you save him?" some said Yes, while some gave a big No. I was in the "yes" group. The other side asked "What do you think/feel if he kills another person in the future?"

Any answers from you guys?

When I was in high school, my classmates went into an argument, "If you were seeing a near-death murderer, would you save him?" some said Yes, while some gave a big No. I was in the "yes" group. The other side asked "What do you think/feel if he kills another person in the future?"

Any answers from you guys?

Basically I'd have been in the no-group. I may sound harsh, but I believe that once a person murders one or several times, they become incompatible with the society, and their existence itself puts the society in danger, and for the sake of it, the murderer has to be removed. Which means executed, or sentenced to forced labors. So if I were seeing a near-death murdered, I would just let him die, for the sake of the balance and the stability of the society I'm living in.
I'd like to read your opinion on the subject too Oliver, why would you save him ?

I will anser your post later Anon, I currently am quite busy and I want to thoroughly answer it ;)

I'm gonna eat right now, enjoy your lunch and have fun here guys !

last edited at Aug 28, 2016 2:45PM

So I just finished watching Crow's Blood...was enjoyable for the most part, but ep 6 really bought down the show for me; it was a good ep at the start, felt like something out of 28 [time] later with all the random ppl being killed...then everything when down hill when the pointless as all hell male forced het love interest showed up. It's like the writer(s) stopped trying because the "all important het pairing in a horror film" rule mustn't be broken, suddenly everyone was resorting to using bare hands...when they were chopping and slicing ppl up just a few minutes ago, like wtf seriously. And then there's contrived BS where the male character survived getting a f-ing knife stabbed into his neck without even the use of the Crow's Blood regeneration virus, just because f-ing romance plot armor...

Tbh if they removed the pointless male character from the story I wouldn't even have minded the main antagonist dying in the end despite her being the best character; would've been a good sci-fi yuri-subtext-ish horror story with a tragic ending, considering the antagonist genuinely had affection for the protagonist in some way. What I am so irked about atm is how it feels like the antagonist was killed off just because whoever made the show wanted a happy het ending, even if it means completely breaking the show's logic.

I don't get it, if you're going to bloody create something with an all girl cast, why the flying f would you add a male character inside, it makes 0 sense; the chararacter didn't even added anything of value to the show other than being the obligatory het love interest, hell, I cringed everytime I see him and the main protagonist interact because it felt so forced and boring. The f-ing creators could've focused on furthering the already amazing dynamic that the antagonist and protagonist had since ep 1 but threw in some forced garbage instead, what fan-tucking-fastic writing right there.

Aside from my displeasure at that particular element of the show, it was actually really suspenseful and delivered well on the horror aspects; would still give it a 5/10 and will recommend it for the horror if the forced romance aspect is ignored.

last edited at Nov 3, 2016 12:31AM

When I was in high school, my classmates went into an argument, "If you were seeing a near-death murderer, would you save him?" some said Yes, while some gave a big No. I was in the "yes" group. The other side asked "What do you think/feel if he kills another person in the future?"

Any answers from you guys?

@oliver I cannot help but say that I really like those kind of questions. Cheers for asking an interesting question!

I'll just go out of my way and say out front that I'd save them.

The simplest reasoning is the fact that my natural instinct would tell me so.. letting someone die can be a very traumatic experience, and it takes nerves of steel to let someone die on your eyes.

Not gonna listen here any arguments for/against "it would maek you a murderer as well". Selfish reasons aside, I'm a firm believer that we as human beings are in no position to take someone's life, even if indirectly.

Guessing if they'd go for a kill anyone is a crapshot imho. It really could depand on that person's mental state (not using the word "morality" here on purpose).

A good allegory is directly murdering someone with bare hands.. might seem easy, but it takes a lot of dedication and energy, it's much harder than it seems. There's a reason why so many policemen/soldiers suffer from PTSD even tho. the people they killed/injured were doing immoral things.

Sometimes I wonder if I should go to grad school or just join the workforce when I'm done.