Sociopath Community

_Alice_ said: 

I as the real Alice would never condone the death of SC, I hope it always exists. It's kind of my favorite place on the internet to be honest, even when I'm away for long periods.

Keeping this quote for future puppets then. 😁

At the moment Tony, Med, Trypt, and of course peach are in the best positions to know if I am Alice or not given they interact with me on Discord and Peach lives with me.

No offense but Spatial and Med get a lot of shit wrong, and Tryp while more thorough lets himself jump to conclusions about as readily as I do (but he does have your original Discord account... hmm).

Peach would be the best bet of verification, assuming she doesn't end up PMing with the one behind this puppet to try to prank people if not just verifying it falsely for the lols. She tends to be honest though so it'd probably mean more.

They do get a lot wrong but in this particular case Tony has been a consistent contact and for the past weeks I've been talking to Med more than anyone.

Doesn't make them any more lucid though, at most they could show a screencap to prove it since their word is... uhh...

I have quite a file on each of them, to say the least, that has me cast doubt on them accurately giving details in spite of their false information not being outright lies as far as they can tell. 
 

What information do you need to increase your certainty and how certain do you need to be?

You'd need to say, show, or otherwise present something only the real Alice would know or have, with someone like Peach to verify it as a secondary source. If you never changed Discord accounts Tryp could probably prove it too with a screencap or something where you're like "Yeah I'm the weird username with Underscores" (presuming Alice doesn't end up saying yes for the lols...).

For most people I usually have something more to work with for proof-stuff, but... not really for you/her beyond times Alice has put in more effort than was necessary. I don't think we did much if anything on Discord either, and the mutual groups we were in she left.

You are at least at this point not acting like the puppet dude, but unlike Peach, Alice wasn't distinctive enough on here until getting into a rant. If this were a puppet pretending to be her it'd be better for people to be skeptical, rather than accept any account claiming to be her as if it were. I've seen enough accounts here do that with others pretended on (alongside fake Alice accounts too) that it's safer to question it when they aren't otherwise flashy enough to make it obvious, like Psychopath Dave or TK, but even with a lack of flair time passing with continued activity still helps. 

We can do the discord thing but lets see if you remember this, you do have a good memory.

You and I have had very few interactions in DM, however once upon a time when crave was around a brief dm took place on discord in which you asked me if I really speak the way I type.

Looking at my Discord now, there appears to be two of you under #2734 and #5511. The former has our older conversations in it while the latter has had no words exchanged. 

The conversation you brought up is from 01/09/18, that's good enough for me until something else throws a wrench in the works. 

A question, what does it mean that I've never been distinct enough? I agree my rants can get little crazy to say the least.

The rants are where your wordplay gets weirder from focusing more on the material, while shorter stuff at most has the appearance of putting on airs. 

#5511 is my current, the last one went under for reasons I don't recall.

It's interesting how organized your information on everyone is. I disorganized and barely pay attention tbh, I can rarely recognize a puppet as having consistent traits of other puppets yet you all seem to do it without effort.

_Alice_ said: 

#5511 is my current, the last one went under for reasons I don't recall.

It's interesting how organized your information on everyone is. I disorganized and barely pay attention tbh, I can rarely recognize a puppet as having consistent traits of other puppets yet you all seem to do it without effort.

It's not organized it's a god damn labyrinthian mess. 😭 

Oh, and welcome back. 

_Alice_ said: 

Turncoat said: 

_Alice_ said: 

I don't mind your response, it will continue to be the standard.

...why would you mind my response?

By my statement I am merely saying that your response is the typical one and it will assure the problem continues well into the future, and I totally accept that future.

What kind of world would it be if no one leaned on those of superior understanding, only believing that which they've personally tested? 

They'd die before they even get through half of it. Beyond that I disagree with your idea that a paper once published can't be attacked by superior findings beyond the realm of gatekeeping practices and paywalls. Older findings have been debunked and replaced in general, so why not other ones if you otherwise have the means?

 A world full of mathematicians, we'd all starve to death but it'd be so romantic.

...when every person has to test every scientific theory, meaning they need to spend the time becoming educated in it to the point of mastery, alongside doing this with History, Philosophy, Media... 

They would die before they finish, since they need to not only learn all the material, but also it's history, it's terminology, how the process works, and if they were no good at the subject (or otherwise not very smart in general) then they won't be able to believe in any of it. On top of that there's the room for bias through mere exposure, they could end up repeating the same results from learning all the same materials, meaning the replicated results would lack the variation that might serve to find flaws in it in the first place, so how would one even test that beyond not learning the material and starting from scratch caveman-style? 

As a layman, there is only the value of novelty in it if I am not bringing any practical applications to it. Rather than have to test everything from a first person view, there's value in taking the shortcuts found from reading a textbook or listening to someone who's taken the time to master the subject I lack it in. It's why sources are so important when making a claim, I can skate by much more streamline by building a catalogue of others points to parrot in other conversations, and if any of it ever ends up disproven then them showing how I was wrong can end up helping me. 

A more feasible fix would be a change to publishing culture where if something is published you know its almost certainly right, we just don't live in that world for some reason.

Isn't that essentially what the sciences aim to do, hence peer reviews and the like? If a theory is otherwise laughable they will laugh at them, like that one pseudo-psychologist (who's name escapes me right now) who tried to claim that emotions could affect the exterior world by showing how his moods changed the color of paper. 
 
Doesn't mean it works, but it is the aim. 

That wouldn't solve miss use of papers in twitter fights

Nothing will fix Twitter, it caters to speed and ease of access, falling into bandwagon logic and celebrities to prove points. 

but we don't really need to fix that, things would be more hopeful if experts in their field actually where experts in something.

Oh I hope it's never fixed, it's a great source of data when left undisturbed. 

I've been thinking about the place Physicalism has in my philosophy of science.

We come into contact with something we call the physical world through our perceptions. The physical world is an epistemic or ontological aspect of our perception, but it is unclear which one it is because it is uncertain whether our perception accurately reflects reality. Through our perception, we can make inferences and draw conclusions about the physical world based on observation and plausible reasoning. We can evaluate the validity of these inferences and conclusions through the process of induction. However, even if a conjecture is inductively sound, it does not necessarily mean that it is true. Despite this, such conjectures can still be considered a form of knowledge.

I do not believe that the only thing that exists is the physical, but rather that there is an aspect of reality that is physical. 

looking back at this thread i have no idea why i down voted multiple posts in this thread, it must of been accidental but i find it hilarious so i'm goign to leave it there

AliceInWonderland said: 

I've been thinking about the place Physicalism has in my philosophy of science.

We come into contact with something we call the physical world through our perceptions. The physical world is an epistemic or ontological aspect of our perception, but it is unclear which one it is because it is uncertain whether our perception accurately reflects reality. Through our perception, we can make inferences and draw conclusions about the physical world based on observation and plausible reasoning. We can evaluate the validity of these inferences and conclusions through the process of induction. However, even if a conjecture is inductively sound, it does not necessarily mean that it is true. Despite this, such conjectures can still be considered a form of knowledge.

I do not believe that the only thing that exists is the physical, but rather that there is an aspect of reality that is physical. 

 i had this dope realization in therapy that the reason i struggled with the concept of 'reality' and was feeling like nothing was real was actually a coping mechanism to allow me to feel like i had control or could decide what was real and what wasn't. totally unrelated but. 

the questioning reality thing reminds me of that type you talked about how you like had that wild experience with the coma thing and i just wonder if its still processing mentally for you 

totally understandable. i had a NDE (near death experience) when i was 12 and i still have yet to fully process it in therapy, but the first several years afterward made an impact. 

you don't just have these sorts of things happen and then pick up and return to everything as normal. i struggled to 'process' this experience and still do sometimes to this day. 

Blanc said: 

looking back at this thread i have no idea why i down voted multiple posts in this thread, it must of been accidental but i find it hilarious so i'm goign to leave it there

You've, uh, done that "on accident" a lot then. 

Turncoat said: 

Blanc said: 

looking back at this thread i have no idea why i down voted multiple posts in this thread, it must of been accidental but i find it hilarious so i'm goign to leave it there

You've, uh, done that "on accident" a lot then. 

 thats so strange, i don't remember doing that XD what in the world