Also, I'm a soulist. I recognise that all parts of our experiential reality are subjective and socially constructed. And right now, that reality is defined by the rich and powerful. You cannot fight a war while believing that your enemy's weapons are natural and immutable. You cannot fight the rich from inside a reality they control and win. Even if you kill them all, you'll still live in the world they created. You need to take power over reality for the people. That's the only way anyone can ever be free.
exocrinous
joined 9 months ago
Does this, uh, does this guy even know how to draw middle eastern people? Or are all his characters changed to be white?
You think you can talk to me that way? Do you? Well have a lovely day too! I hope you find peace and enlightenment!
I like that at least one trans person helped make Warframe, because Warframe is a trans allegory and it makes me feel good. Kinda adds layers that the only Tenno NPC we know of is voiced by a trans person.
Second Dream
Before my egg cracked, my operator was masculine but I mained a feminine Warframe. Now I know who I am, my operator is feminine, and I still main the same Warframe. That's a really cool ludonarrative synchronicity. I was trans in Warframe before I even knew I was trans. Hell yeah, that's just good game design.
Dream not of what you are, but of what you want to be.
Stalin wasn't far left. The man made being gay illegal. That's not the behaviour of a leftist.
Everything is a bias, everything is subjective, everything is open to interpretation. But most people think their own point of view is unbiased, no matter what it is. This is just a fact that naturally arises from believing in such a thing as unbiased information. It should be obvious. People want to hold whatever viewpoint they think is unbiased, so they do. People can be convinced to become racists, which necessarily implies that people can be convinced racism is unbiased. You didn't think racists all knew they were biased, did you? They think they're unbiased the same as you do, because you're both humans who want to believe that you have the good opinions, and that good opinions are unbiased. And the fact is, you're both equally correct on that front. You're both equally biased. It's just that you're biased in favour of compassion and equality, while they're biased in favour of hatred and supremacy. But the amount of bias is the same, because there's no such thing as an unbiased viewpoint. You just think kindness isn't a bias because you like kindness and you've been taught biases are bad things. Likewise, they think supremacy isn't a bias because they like supremacy and they've been taught biases are bad things. And if you're wondering if there's an alternative to the way both you and this racist think? Yes there is, you can knowingly adopt good biases. I'm knowingly biased in favour of kindness, because I like kindness. I think choosing such a way of thinking makes me more capable of empathising with people I disagree with, understanding why they act the way they do, so I can attack the more foundational reasons for their belief effectively. It means I'm never surprised to see stuff like this. Because the thing is, they think exactly the way most people do. Just with different starting points.
This is why Australia has the highest percentage of deciduous trees in the world
Red Dwarf has a gag where the crew has a time machine, but have sworn never to use it because of the potential dangers. But then the ship's curry supply is lost in a flood, and Lister (an average British slob) decides to go back to 20th century Earth for some curry.
Later on in the series they need a tyrannosaurus rex to lose its lunch, so they make a giant curry. The dinosaur loves the curry, and after having its fill it goes for the ship's supplies of lager and ice cream
Nah, Lemmy isn't usually this cool
I like the way the Denobulans in Star Trek handle marriage. Every woman has up to three husbands and every man has up to three wives. I wouldn't like to live under strict marriage rules of any kind, but that seems far better than Earth's rules.
It is reasonable, and polite, to assume a person knows their own mind better than any external person, and if prompted, has right of interpretation to their own beliefs, knowledge and convictions.
No, I disagree. I agree with you that we have the right to interpret our own intentions freely, because intentions cannot reliably be externally sensed. But let me give an example as to our beliefs and biases.
Suppose I'm a scientist conducting trials on a new drug. I gather a group of volunteer test subjects, and begin trials to compare the drug to a placebo. However, after they take the drug (and placebo), some of the test subjects come to me and say "You don't have to test me, doc. I'm immune to placebos. I can feel this working, so I know I'm in the experimental group and I know the drug works great."
If I were to apply your idea that you can't mistrust someone else's biases and beliefs about themself, then I would have to take their word and my science would be garbage.
To adress your argument: the person is convinced they take an atheist position
Yes, my question proved that very neatly, didn't it? They didn't think they had any belief in being an atheist, and that the final line of the original meme was therefore nonsense. But I used a very elegant question to prove that they do have belief in being an atheist.
And that day she learned the importance of punctuality