Sociopath Community

Dragoonback said: 

 Helping people is pretty evil because people are inherently evil.

Yes.

 I'd say SM is more evil than Ted Bundy because SM would want an SA victim to give birth, while Ted Bundy didn't let them give birth. 

Ofc you categorize Jada as against you so you must deny his intellectual differences that might prove someone who is smart can disagree with you. You are vehemently against policies that help people live, and claim to be pro-life, and yes abortion availability is also a policy that helps people live, including the medical help options that cannot be available otherwise.

It is NOT justified to end already present sentient life, from a negative-utilitarian based anti-natalist perspective. Promortalists usually wind up committing massacres or in mental wards for a reason. Also it is not justified to end the life of a fetus either as the fetus will feel pain and suffer. It should never begin to grow in the first place and is caused by human negligence or irresponsibility, some delusional notion of egoistic sadism to continue the suffering entropy of sentience, etc. The same way it is not justified to continue killing chickens in factory farms for their fetuses for human sensation "taste."
Thoughts on people eating cats and dogs?
Because I want to know if i should stop being vegan and if you actually have a valid argument
Maybe you will change my mind
I would like to change my mind if I am wrong about something

I do not want to change your mind about being vegan but I fucking hate vegans cause they make everything about being vegan. They will not admit that vegan natalists disprove that antinatalism (and therefor the sparing of further slaughter and Moksha) does not equal veganism.

I tried to go vegan but I'm too skinny and I had weird pains right after I tried it that went away when I went back to meat and diary. Also nobody I know respects that diet. 

Tony's posts are not all that difficult to translate, actually (unless they're about crypto and investments.)

His opinions about people are standard for a MGTOW.

lol anyway... MGTOWs are mostly damaged and socially awkward men, ranging in severity from mildly autistic up to deranged narcopaths.

They have difficulty with their relationships with women. Their misogynistic philosophies align sharply with incels and PUAs, with slightly different expected outcomes. Which is kinda funny, cuz...definition of insanity and all that. 😋 I guess it's more about commiserating with other damaged bros and forming lynch mobs or witch pyres or whatever.

Throw in a dash of Machiavelli, and your standard tRumper humper talking points, and you can pretty much break any one of Tony's opinions on any subject down to some sort of a pissing contest with fewer than a dozen goals at its core.

From there, you can usually boil it down further to one or 2.

And that's how I get through Tony's spaghetti. Boomer reference: He's Archie Bunker.

Jada said: 

Tony's posts are not all that difficult to translate, actually (unless they're about crypto and investments.)

Some not, others more so.

His opinions about people are standard for a MGTOW.

That's a new word added to my vocabulary.

lol anyway... MGTOWs are mostly damaged and socially awkward men, ranging in severity from mildly autistic up to deranged narcopaths.

Spatial doesnt strike me as socially awkward, he does come across as deeply hurt.

They have difficulty with their relationships with women. Their misogynistic philosophies align sharply with incels and PUAs, with slightly different expected outcomes. Which is kinda funny, cuz...definition of insanity and all that. 😋 I guess it's more about commiserating with other damaged bros and forming lynch mobs or witch pyres or whatever.

Throw in a dash of Machiavelli, and your standard tRumper humper talking points, and you can pretty much break any one of Tony's opinions on any subject down to some sort of a pissing contest with fewer than a dozen goals at its core.

From there, you can usually boil it down further to one or 2.

I've also noticed that the theme in what Spatial says is narrow. It's either porn, redpill, manosphere, ai, spirituality or money. Anything I'm missing?

And that's how I get through Tony's spaghetti. Boomer reference: He's Archie Bunker.

You did a better job than I did, though I dont hold a very negative view of Spatial. I think on the inside he's not a bad person.

He's adopted a controversial attitude because people feed that part of him imo so that's the only role he knows how to adopt. But despite the way he apparently looks down on people he doesnt look down on them enough not to respond. Despite how controversial his views I'd say he's still a net positive.

So I ask myself, what would Meathead say? And Edith? 😉

lol a couple more controversial than Joker and Harley Quinn. 

Your avoidance of the subject shows, something, changed.

Boredom and anxiety. I said what I needed to say and there was no new material. I'd entertain the topic if I thought it would lead to somewhere new where I could learn, experience, and grow. Instead, I see that path being pretty stale and me being diminished as a person at the end of it.

No dude this has always been him, all that's changed is who he debates.

It was once Ed, now it's us.

Interesting take. I remember things differently. I remember he was whacky in the past and then I thought he was the sanest person here, and now I think he's... Set in his opinion. I dont think theres a better way to describe it.

Jada said: 

Oh I never said they were "inferior", that was the buzzword Xena stuffed in your head in this very thread, and now you're using it as a talking point to argue with me. You're programmable.

...As in I can't figure out if I'm a good person? That's because my Bayesian data is incomplete so the evidence is inconclusive.

I'd argue that epistemologically it has little to do with self awareness and more to do with your ability to gather and synthesize ideas. My argument is that I lack the data to synthesize the ideas conclusively.

If you're thinking of it in terms of your favorite large language models then you could write:

P(word|prompt; training data)

How well you can synthesize the words from the training data is a function of how powerful the AI model is but ultimately if your training data is lacking you will not reach the correct vocabulary. That's why AI must reach robotics to evolve from a highly trained monkey into skynet. 

Jada said: 

 

Why can't a hyper self aware person not determine their own moral standing, or know if they're a good person ?

Because the data on what is a good person is inconclusive.

 Genomics companies will use Beysian tactics to predict your behaviours and potential flesh evolutions as your body decays and classify you as an unfit trogolodyte and put you under house arrest for not being genetically compliant enough to use the public transport systems just because you harassed the wrong guy on rednote or something and your polygenic risk score got hacked by the deep state (which was just some losers corrupt NLP application trained to flag anything ever written by Uyghurs as dispreferential) which the company turned out to be in control of the entire time so the algorithm was already set up to be against you from the start and the company's policy required complete genomic analysis to even sign up for to lower polygenic risk factor scores among the userbase to keep the website's algorithm free from subhumans polluting it with their inferior social credit convergence. 

Jada said: 

He's one of the easier ones to understand even when the rhetoric is nearly batshit, and I genuinely appreciate that about him. I come away smarter rather than dumber from each of our exchanges, finding tons of room to research things and reference former arguments based on my experiences with him.

I hope he and I never stop arguing honestly, I think it makes both of us into better people by the end of it.

 Do you think he sees it that way?

He finds appreciation in the arguments just as I do, it's why he comes back to it until exhausted of the urge. 

Then he returns once more. 

At any rate, I appreciate that your relationship is not as sour as it was a year ago.

People have been using that word like a hundred times on here and you do a fair amount of social media dives, don't lie.

This shit started in the early 2000s.

mGTOW?

Its a new one for me. I only knew PUAs and then masculinism or whatever that male version of feminism is.

I personally love women, so Id never consider myself a misogynist. Most of my research group is women. They're great.

I don't believe you, specifically over being ignorant to a word as readily available on the internet as 'water'. 

I understand ignorance of their themes, but you witness social media and even reference it. It'd take willful ignorance to not see it, and we both know based on your history you're smarter than that. 

Your avoidance of the subject shows, something, changed.

Boredom and anxiety. I said what I needed to say and there was no new material. I'd entertain the topic if I thought it would lead to somewhere new where I could learn, experience, and grow. Instead, I see that path being pretty stale and me being diminished as a person at the end of it.

Anxiety? 

You're WINNING!

What is there to fear? Why not redundantly state it boldly to someone enough times to erode their defenses? 

No dude this has always been him, all that's changed is who he debates.

It was once Ed, now it's us.

Interesting take. I remember things differently. I remember he was whacky in the past and then I thought he was the sanest person here, and now I think he's... Set in his opinion. I dont think theres a better way to describe it.

Ignore your thoughts, as I have even my own. 

Look at the words, he's consistent. It's one of his strongest qualities. 

Turncoat said: 

Jada said: 

He's one of the easier ones to understand even when the rhetoric is nearly batshit, and I genuinely appreciate that about him. I come away smarter rather than dumber from each of our exchanges, finding tons of room to research things and reference former arguments based on my experiences with him.

I hope he and I never stop arguing honestly, I think it makes both of us into better people by the end of it.

 Do you think he sees it that way?

He finds appreciation in the arguments just as I do, it's why he comes back to it until exhausted of the urge. 

Then he returns once more. 

At any rate, I appreciate that your relationship is not as sour as it was a year ago.

No no, it's sour as Sour Patch Kids. 

But those candies are damn good. 

People have been using that word like a hundred times on here and you do a fair amount of social media dives, don't lie.

This shit started in the early 2000s.

mGTOW?

Its a new one for me. I only knew PUAs and then masculinism or whatever that male version of feminism is.

I personally love women, so Id never consider myself a misogynist. Most of my research group is women. They're great.

I don't believe you, specifically over being ignorant to a word as readily available on the internet as 'water'. 

I understand ignorance of their themes, but you witness social media and even reference it. It'd take willful ignorance to not see it, and we both know based on your history you're smarter than that. 

Dunno what to say here. I didn't know what mgtow means. It sounds like an explosive.

Your avoidance of the subject shows, something, changed.

Boredom and anxiety. I said what I needed to say and there was no new material. I'd entertain the topic if I thought it would lead to somewhere new where I could learn, experience, and grow. Instead, I see that path being pretty stale and me being diminished as a person at the end of it.

Anxiety? 

You're WINNING!

What is there to fear? Why not redundantly state it boldly to someone enough times to erode their defenses? 

State what? I dont consider Spatial a threat if that's what you mean. I'm anxious over how me winning the argument makes me a lesser person whereas disengaging makes me a better person. 

I was never going to lose. I won the moment that my challenges were not accepted, which was like on page 2. The rest was just about defending myself against insults by gloating over my victory, but I think I can do better. The conversation was mostly going I circles over how deadlocked Spatial's argument was from page 2 when he refused every one of my challenges. It's more because I don't feel Spatial is a threat that I disengage and become bored.

It's also that I had a dream about Spatial and I wanted to explore that, but it was not possible without first clearing up the other topic out of the way.

No dude this has always been him, all that's changed is who he debates.

It was once Ed, now it's us.

Interesting take. I remember things differently. I remember he was whacky in the past and then I thought he was the sanest person here, and now I think he's... Set in his opinion. I dont think theres a better way to describe it.

Ignore your thoughts, as I have even my own. 

Look at the words, he's consistent. It's one of his strongest qualities. 

He was not so much into the manosphere back in the day. He even allied with Luna. 

Legga. Since you have difficulty determining if you're a good person, this is all you need to ask yourself.

- Would you like to watch a life review, detailing everything you ever did from Birth to this point.

People with short fuses and have a low capacity to forgive will say no. If forced to watch, they will be on the lookout for beautiful moments, like letting a fly out the door instead of killing it.

I know people who road rage if someone passes them incorrectly so they will tailgate or pull a NASCAR pass just to get ahead in traffic. They flip off and yell out the window in rage and use the horn a lot, These types of people are cursed by countless minds and it adds up. They especially lose their shit if someone else is driving like a jackass. Being in a car while such a person is driving is cancerous energy that impacts passengers more than some stranger who just thinks they're a jerk. This type of person will be quick to say no to something like a life review.  Sure they have another side to them which is as good as they're bad, but I've seen this type of person cut off people cause a person never accepted their own dirty laundry. 

That's not all.

- What does your inner circle think of you.

This matters. Forget yourself when it comes to knowing if you're a good person since you can't seem to figure that out anyway, and believe me there is no, as you say, lack of data. ( A song I like says something about "life doesn't skip anyone" This means you will experience a lot and it's up to you how you handle things. )

In short, what determines a good person is if you're good for the environment, that being a general public of decency. This is based on what's true and not what people think.

Some will say good and bad are social construct, and go as far as to make a case for someone who invades homes, steals, kills, rapes and all of the above, while even a person who does these things wouldn't want someone like them around either. This of course is an extreme case.

.

Since the first page I'm the only person staying on topic. I don't respond to you cause I'm dumb when you're fishing for validation in a silly way. ( Seriously saying you're hyper self aware, but unaware if you're a good person is silly ). I respond to your inquiry because I can. 

I also think you'd rather hear us say "You're a jolly good fellow" while in the process have us believe you're still hyper self aware. Not self aware, or self conscious, but hyper self aware. To me that comes across as reaching for credit where it isn't due.  

Here's the thing about MGTOW.

There's no specific reason for a man doing this. 

- He could have a broken heart

- Bad experiences with women

- Can't talk to women

- Has a small penis or whatever

- Is spineless

- Been abused by women over and over again

- Straight up doesn't like women or has a great disdain for them

- Has some issue with women 

For whatever reason there are men who don't fuck with women. 

It's not meant to piss off women, these guys are dead serious. Most men are ignored by women anyway, but there are some women who get triggered by this and want to fling poo at this concept. 

The same people who hate men going their own way, are the same people who are all "You go girl" when a woman wants nothing to do with men and fly solo. Swap the genders and these guys are to be hated.

Me and MGTOW ? Ha ha ha. The ideology resonates with me and I still have women in my life, It's just not on my agenda to pursue new connections with them. Everytime a woman gets close, it's too much adventure. Men should only focus on the women in their life.