Sounds like you might enjoy people being honest to you rather than enjoying compliments or criticism. Criticism is more blunt when said to someone’s face, but compliments can seem disingenuous, so maybe you don’t believe the compliments subconsciously
Lucifer’s Hebrew name is Helel!
If you can put the grounds in a bag or filter, it’ll save a lot of time in the future when you might want to filter it so it’s not like drinking sand or silt.
Also if you choose to filter, know that filtering can take a long time because the smaller grounds can clog up the pores. So go from filtering course to fine eg. use a sieve, then cheesecloth, then paper coffee filters, etc. based on how filtered you want it or your patience
I’m liking cold brew, served hot. Tastes more chocolatey and less bitter than hot brews
We have our senses in the form of our physical sense-organs, and the nervous system centralized in the brain to make sense of the sensory inputs to the organs.
That’s about it in terms of individual bodies. We can communicate with other people and things which extends our range.
Internally, there is a lot of “range” ie our mind can figure out or guess at things, but it’s not always correct, and any information we gain from this is stuck inside our heads.
Even when we act on thoughts, the thought is still inside us. However much we describe our thoughts, we don’t really transfer them so to speak. Thoughts don’t impart physical actions as much as me writing down my crush’s name on a piece of paper causes a relationship to form. It’s material things and people who ultimately cause actions.
There’s a scenario in philosophy, in the west called Gettier problems. Using the Indian philosopher Dharmottara’s words:
A fire has just been lit to roast some meat. The fire hasn’t started sending up any smoke, but the smell of the meat has attracted a cloud of insects. From a distance, an observer sees the dark swarm above the horizon and mistakes it for smoke. “There’s a fire burning at that spot,” the distant observer says. Does the observer know that there is a fire burning in the distance?
This is to say, we can get all the information we think we need, process it correctly, and be correct, yet not correct. This is how I would consider scenarios which feel like something freaky just happened
Europe and European colonies have been in wars constantly since the fall of the Roman empire. The first and second Hundred Years, the Napoleonic Wars, the first and second World Wars, the Cold War, the Afghanistan and Iraq Wars…
Not to mention capitalism has brought itself to its knees pretty consistently every decade or so in recessions and depressions
They really think they’re unique from the rest of the world but can’t admit that the USSR and China are the real exceptional ones in history
I’m glad India owns the islands. Not that India is some champion of indigenous peoples, in fact they are an imperial power in their own right. But it would have been worse if some Western nation owned it (like they still do other islands in the Indian, Pacific, and Atlantic oceans, wtf)
The Sentinelese make obvious that lustful chauvinistic gaze of the West that I haven’t seen in other countries, except maybe imperial Japan, which was copying the West anyhow. The whole idea that the world is there is be “studied” and that places like the Sentinel islands are some final frontier is fucked up.
I understand the linguistic and anthropological curiosity a little, though I think researchers should be more humble. Most are humble actually, it’s the general public that still has chauvinism.
The missionaries bother me the most. Christianization has killed off many local cultures, claiming to liberate them but not saying the quiet part about control and whatever prophecy about the end days where everyone needs to be Christian I think. In India, the lower castes and pariahs mostly are Christian, with the promise of equality, but in reality they still have the caste system within their communities and are just pariahs in different ways at large now. So not much has changed. I am also brown and live in the US, so I have felt the lustful gaze of missionaries throughout my life here. I get missionaries banging on my door every week now. It’s kinda scary, considering the KKK were around only a while ago here.
Also interesting fact, the Andaman and Nicobar island were home to British jails for political prisoners. Indian rebels and revolutionaries met in jail there and even founded parties for independence and socialism. In a way, the islands are a birthplace of Indian revolutionary spirit
Yes definitely, in D&D as a player you get all the details about what and where, and you only have to fill in the how. For example, the character sheet is basically a template with slots and points that you can find precalculated examples for. The only thing you fill in is your backstory, and take actions during the story.
The DM is also usually helpful to suggest hints or ask leading questions in case you still are stumped during roleplay.
Oddly enough and ironically, structure and restrictions can open things to creativity. It’s kind of like distilling a project to just the creative portion.
Personally I used to do a lot of writing, worldbuilding, and language construction when I was younger before I burned out in school. I wanted to get back to that but couldn’t come up with any ideas like I used to. But then I decided to lay down some rules. D&D was mentioned, which is a great example for this: you get a highly developed setting and specific scenarios, but it’s up to you to find the solution to the problem.
It’s not exactly play as you asked. But maybe you could consider play as part of what I’m talking about. The first part, when you’re entertaining all sorts of ideas, before picking a solution, feels like play to me. Although I like the next part more, when everything and everyone clicks on a solution. It feels like a bonding experience ig
Interpreting “essential” in the philosophical sense, that it is impossible to find a genuine communist who is not misotheist: no
(btw misotheism is the hatred of God, and hating God requires you to believe in God. I assume you mean aggressively atheist or anti-religion)
You can be a communist and believe in God. You will probably come across inconsistencies somewhere, but that doesn’t really disqualify you from being a communist. I’m pulling out that quote:
We call communism the real movement which abolishes the present state of things. The conditions of this movement result from the premises now in existence.
Being a communist is more about what we do materially. Our actions are informed by our previous and current conditions. These conditions might include religion. This doesn’t disqualify us from communism. In fact it might require it in some cases.
Also, our actions are informed by conditions, but that doesn’t always mean well-informed. Part of the communist attitude involves improving this so we do become well-informed. This might involve becoming more familiar with religion (eg. if we need to work with a religious community), or rejecting it (eg. we are recovering from leaving a toxic religious community).
Yeah I just rewatched recently too and the sexism seems unnecessary. Just being a know-it-all or even just fighting his own twisted sense of warrior masculinity is enough of a start point for his arc.
The space sword episode being his redemption, one of my favorite episodes
I might be confused on this but doesn’t a morality play involve some flaw or sin causing a tragedy? So Sokka would have to be sexist and then get karmically punished for that?
Phrases like “American Dream” and “Manifest Destiny” are just euphemisms for genocide and exploitation.
No other country has concepts like this. They have stuff like mottos and national ideals, but the people have existed long enough in the land to be their own motivation to exist as a nation. The US was created in order to commit genocide and exploit the land. They justify nationhood and citizenship after the fact.
I think it’s just the Anglo colonies that qualify for this, since European colonies “allowed” indigenous people to persist in some manner. Even then, there’s no eg. Canadian or Australian dream that I’ve heard of. So it’s just American being exceptional, exceptionally genocidal and exploitative.
One time someone said something and I misheard them, so the sentence sounded ungrammatical and nonsensical to me, like something beyond my conventional understanding of the world thus far. I instantly lost my sanity
POC. Idk if this counts exactly since it started with bigotry then was reclaimed/euphemized
The part that bothers me is that it feels a little like I’m still being called a “colored person” just in a different phrasing, and later on, in abbreviation. I still call myself brown, white people as white, etc. without issue.
So I think it’s more that brown people have always known ourselves to be brown, but not “colored” — that is a slur used by white people against us. Like in our native languages we have a concept of skin shade. But not “coloredness”
Also “POC” sounds a little weird to me, like how saying “people of brownness” or POB feels artificial and awkward.
Not really against “POC” though since people use it broadly already.
No worries! Nietzsche’s philosophy is just a pretty tricky subject in general, maybe the most in the field. I just wanted to drop in a comment about that
Nietzsche hated Nazis though , or at least would have. He’s a complicated guy who hates everyone though. He said some shit for sure, but he’s one of those philosophers everyone interprets to death. The Nazis definitely interpreted him very poorly though, likely on purpose.
I’m a conlanger, so I construct languages. I’m working on a conlang set in a world where the European conquest of India was far more brutal, including the suppression of native languages. But the people get around it with pigdins, creoles, and cants.
There is one cant in our real world which I am taking as inspiration called Khalsa Bole (the speech of the Pure ie Sikhs) or Gar Gar Bole (thundering speech), used by Akali Nihang warrior-saints. The coding is funny sometimes, and sometimes just badass.
Here’s one example:
savā lakh = 125,000-strong army (literal meaning) = approach of one Nihang Sikh (encoded meaning)
I’m second panel unfortunately. I’m trying to research the evolution of Indo-Aryan and Dravidian languages. But any resources outside of Romance and maybe Germanic is so hard to find, especially if you’re not a linguistics student at a university…
To keep it simple, humans are a social species. Perhaps the most social in existence, given we developed language, sciences, and civilization…all of these have a base assumption of social relations.
It’s a false dichotomy to pretend that the struggle is between the individual vs collective. Because the average individual is always part of society, and society functions for the sake of its members. The two developed interrelated, from before humans were biologically humans.
Ignoring this fact and portraying it like you need to choose one is wrong. This is the problem of idealism. Idealism just picks and chooses some idea because it sounds good at the time eg. “individualism” but refuses to acknowledge the historical context and dynamics.
A dialectical view would reveal that people tending towards individualism are reacting to the current dynamic which only appears like individualism vs collectivism. But stepping back and looking at this dynamic shows it’s not really an eternal duel between dualities. They’re not even dualities.
That’s why we can predict a new stage in history, not just another move in a duel. Socialism is not collectivism getting its turn after individualism has its day. It’s breaking past this false duality when people realize individualism in a vacuum doesn’t work.