Sociopath Community

Feathers said: 

I think it's funny some of you really value Liberty. Liberty is an illusion. We are all slaves to something. We all have our masters. Mine is God. 

Liberty is not an illusion as much as freedom is. Liberty is about the pursuit of personal freedoms, aka the room to make your own choices without being chastised for it. Liberty is effectively "Live and Let Live" until it infringes on the liberties of others. 

While I find your path foolish for reasons I could go on for for decades, I still respect your freedom, the liberty you have, to follow said foolish path. 

Of course, what separates us here truly is that you see granting people such liberty as damning them to Hell. 

To me freedom is being wise for your future to enable yourself to have the longest possible happiness.

It's not freedom if there's only one way to do it. 

It's not really liberating to only live in the moment and curse your future self.

It's just as liberating as anything else really, but how we choose to gild our cages ought to remain our own choice. 

If we're prisoners of life, slaves of reality, we might as well be able to cultivate it into subscriptions we don't mind carrying. 

My father told me "loans is just stealing from your future self and future happiness". Not having system that has your back is like robbing yourself of freedom and happiness in the future. 

If there were no interest payments I'd see nothing wrong with loans. 

So I don't really value freedom because that's an illusion.

You don't value freedom because you follow a slave religion. 

The true end is the longest amount of happiness with the least amount of risks of suffering.

What makes it "True"?

There is no truths, not that we can grasp with full certainty anyway. The only things we can truly know are our own personal truths and how they correspond with collective opinion within our grasp. 

I serve to achieve these means because a happy and secure servant is better than a miserable master. I am very happy because I chose who I serve without pretending. 

Chose who you will serve and if you chose the right master you will be truly happy.

I do the same thing, but the people you choose to follow I have no respect for. 

This path though isn't for everyone, you're projecting. I would never presume to think that everyone'd be happier if they were dominated by the right dude, just those who are specifically looking for that. 

Now I will admit I am a "free spirit".

But that's an illusion amirite? 

Or do you just mean that your spirit didn't cost you any money to own? 

"Religion's greatest trick wasn't convincing some people that there was a god, who is all powerful. It was convincing everyone else that you couldn't ridicule the idea." - Ricky Gervais

"If you're born in India, you're probably a Hindu, if you're born in America, you're probably a Christian, if you're born in Pakistan, you're probably a Muslim. That's a coincidence, isn't it? That you're always born into the right god. Isn't that lucky? I was born into the right god. All those others are going to hell. But I was born into the right god, so I'm going to heaven." - Ricky Gervais


If people did their research on Christianity, they'd see that Heaven has an occupancy limit that is obscenely small. I can safely say you will not be one of the 144,000 when you're factoring in not just the 7 billion people alive now, but every person born from the beginning of time until The Rapture. Still, a mindless sinless purgatory on a reformed Earth where Jesus has slain Death itself I guess would still be good enough for most people. I'd rather go to Hell where I can actually keep my mind instead of becoming some mindless God drone with elements of my personality literally ripped from me. 

Even with God staring me in the face and all proof's in front of me to be seen for the Christian reality, that wouldn't be enough. I sympathize too much with The Devil, as he's basically like a human immortal, the accumulation of human history and art all in one being's mind and the ability to witness time pass the same way we do: Forward. The more I read into and debate with people on this subject, the more I realize that Satan's a figure that is far easier to sympathize with. Even his ego expressions are very inherently human, and he's the only one willing to not only endorse us being ourselves, but actually lets us remain ourselves once we enter his realm. 

God meanwhile is basically a processing robot, for he sees the past, present, and future all at once, sees all of space at once, sees into people's hearts and minds, sees everything. When you can see everything, you no longer have choices, as he'd inevitably be stuck making all the best choices for himself. Prayer is also pointless for this reason, as he should already know what is best for Life, and if your prayer was enough to change that then he must not already be doing the best thing. 

If personal liberties are a damning thing, then I'd rather be damned. 

You're saying in your view... "Liberty = The ability to pursue freedom without chastisement. Freedom: I'm assuming is what I described as an illusion. The ability to pursue what is best for you in the long term is true freedom rather than never submitting to anything or anyone." ?

By the way I was talking about politics and this world not eternity in this part. I don't think voting against tolls and taxes are sending anyone to hell. I just think it's unwise as you have no safety net if you ever fall down (which can very likely happen).

I'm not sure what you mean it's not freedom is there's only one way. Unless you're talking about heaven. My point is that freedom is the freedom to find your longest happiness not your freedom to have momentary self gratification and destroy yourself. I wouldn't call a drug addict free because they're so unwise they've traded their lives for momentary highs.

Being unable to have self control isn't freedom in any sense to me. It's just acting upon your impulses without wisdom to your own downfall. It's not freeing to pursue drugs if it ruins your life, freeing to cheat if you lose your wife, freeing to gamble if you lose all your livelyhood and so on. It's just utter beastly and unruly and foolish.

Let me show you my version of freedom...

I think you'll understand what I'm trying to convey. I do value freedom but in a different sense. By "true" freedom I mean the ultimate sense of freedom and happiness over the longest amount of time. The most "beneficial" one.

The people I chose to follow you have no respect for? Is that God? I'm not talking about being dominated by the right dude. I'm talking about the enslaving power of responsibility and running your life and soul into the ground.

Responsibility does not feel freeing it feels burdensome. I hate responsibility even over my own self. Being saved from my own wrong choices is better than preserving my pride.

I am a free spirit because I will not bow down to anyone in whom I chose not to submit.

1. 144, 000 and interpretation variances and context.

I don't know what you're talking about. You mock religion all you want. You have cursed God all you wanted.

I would be a Christian no matter where I was born. I was born in an atheistic type of raising. I didn't know about Christianity and I said "I will not worship a God unless he has a family. I could only trust a God who has a family because it shows character. I would still consider them if that family member died". That already rules out many religions. One's where God does not have a son are out of the picture.

Heaven having an occupancy of 144, 000 people? I think you presume to understand revelations which is an extremely symbolic book. 

First of all there's different views on the timelines of the end times. Amillennialism, Postmillenial, and so on. Some think Christ comes with his saved that were in heaven then sets up a kingdom and reigns for 1,000 years on earth then creates the new heaven and new earth with anyone who does not rebel. Some think the 1,000 years is symbolic and Christ will come with those in heaven and make a new heaven and earth with just those who are saved then. What parts are symbolic and which parts are not? There's many interpretations of theses verses depending on how symbolic you take revelation. This can depend on denomination.

"Much of the confusion regarding the 144,000 is a result of the false doctrine of the Jehovah’s Witnesses. The Jehovah’s Witnesses claim that 144,000 is a limit to the number of people who will reign with Christ in heaven and spend eternity with God. The 144,000 have what the Jehovah’s Witnesses call the heavenly hope. Those who are not among the 144,000 will enjoy what they call the earthly hope—a paradise on earth ruled by Christ and the 144,000" - Got Christian Questions. Even the symbolic false doctrines of Jehovahs think the non elect will be on earth and saved just not in heaven.

But I'll just read parts of the page to you...

The 144, 000 in revelations 7 is then divided by Jewish tribe. So this number seems to only correspond to those saved by the Old Testament covenant.

And I heard the number of the sealed, 144,000, sealed from every tribe of the sons of Israel: 12,000 from the tribe of Judah were sealed, 12,000 from the tribe of Reuben, 12,000 from the tribe of Gad, 12,000 from the tribe of Asher, 12,000 from the tribe of Naphtali, 12,000 from the tribe of Manasseh, 12,000 from the tribe of Simeon, 12,000 from the tribe of Levi, 12,000 from the tribe of Issachar, 12,000 from the tribe of Zebulun, 12,000 from the tribe of Joseph,12,000 from the tribe of Benjamin were sealed.

After it says who is saved in Israel the next verses directly after in revelations seven describe all those saved by the New Testament covenant in Christ.

After this I looked, and behold, a great multitude that no one could number, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed in white robes, with palm branches in their hands, and crying out with a loud voice, “Salvation belongs to our God who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb!” And all the angels were standing around the throne and around the elders and the four living creatures, and they fell on their faces before the throne and worshiped God.

Sounds like countless people are saved by the blood of Christ and only 144, 000 are saved among Israel when you read the ENTIRE page of revelations 7. Especially since the verse right after the 144, 000 says "after this". Right after that more were added in by the blood of Christ.

2. Satan.

I'm not sure why you sympathize with Satan. He's the most anti body positive person ever... Here I thought you were pro body positivity.

> Satan fell because he Become prideful because of beauty and thought himself superior to everyone.

Ezekiel 28:17 Your heart was proud because of your beauty; you corrupted your wisdom for the sake of your splendor. I cast you to the ground; I exposed you before kings, to feast their eyes on you.

Isaiah 14:12-14 “How you are fallen from heaven, O Day Star, son of Dawn! How you are cut down to the ground, you who laid the nations low! You said in your heart, ‘I will ascend to heaven; above the stars of God I will set my throne on high; I will sit on the mount of assembly in the far reaches of the north; I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most High.’

> God is pro all body types and is body positive.

1 Samuel 16:7 But the Lord said to Samuel, “Do not look on his appearance or on the height of his stature, because I have rejected him. For the Lord sees not as man sees: man looks on the outward appearance, but the Lord looks on the heart.”

Isaiah 53:2 For he [Christ who is the son of God] grew up before him like a young plant, and like a root out of dry ground; he had no form or majesty that we should look at him, and no beauty that we should desire him.

Genesis 29:31 When the LORD saw that Leah was not loved [because of her looks], he enabled her to conceive, but Rachel remained childless.

Proverbs 31:30 Charm is deceptive, and beauty is fleeting; but a woman who fears the LORD is to be praised.

So... Is he still lovely to you? He is worse than Palepeach. Now if you found her appalling how much more should you be appalled by someone who want to destroy and rule just because he's beautiful? He thinks he deserves to rule everyone because of his "beauty".

can you shut up 

Feathers said: 

You're saying in your view... Liberty = The ability to pursue freedom without chastisement.

It's essentially Independence. 

Freedom: I'm assuming is what I described as an illusion. The ability to pursue what is best for you in the long term is true freedom rather than never submitting to anything or anyone."?

Not everyone wants what's best for them in the long term, and that's their choice. Some would rather live hard and die young, and while that's not my preference I can understand those I've met that felt that way. 

Me picking my best choice for "the long term" is definitely not Pro-God though. I don't see the advantages in it at all. Plus imposing this insane racially biased guessing game on us? What kind of sick shit is that? 

I'm not sure what you mean it's not freedom is there's only one way. Unless you're talking about heaven.

About anything. When there's no sense of having options, there's no perception of freedom. 

My point is that freedom is the freedom to find your longest happiness not your freedom to have momentary self gratification and destroy yourself.

This is something you are free to believe, but I meanwhile am free to not. 

While I am personally in no hurry to "destroy myself" right now, who am I or anyone else to say that someone else shouldn't? It's a personal choice, and fundamentally why Kavorkian was a thing. If someone wants to take that kind of control over their lives, as long as it's handled in a way that is genuine to their desires as opposed to a whim of the moment, that is a part of their freedom. 

I wouldn't call a drug addict free because they're so unwise they've traded their lives for momentary highs.

Unless that fate was forced onto them, they've chosen to do that freely. They had enough autonomy and independence to feed this desire, and they ran with it. 

"The Freedom To Make Mistakes" is still a form of freedom. 

Being unable to have self control isn't freedom in any sense to me.

No one can help but be themselves. 

It's not freeing to pursue drugs if it ruins your life

What if it improves it? 

freeing to cheat if you lose your wife

These are conditions, causality. The "cheater" had the freedom to make that choice and accept whatever consequences follow. 

freeing to gamble if you lose all your livelyhood and so on.

Gambling's a tricky one for how it by design is meant to hack the brain of specific mindsets. It's housed as something innocent but it plays on something darker, making it more deceptive than picking up a drug habit. 

It's still a choice as much as anything is by deterministic standards, but it's more covert. 

It's just utter beastly and unruly and foolish. 

It's perspective. 

I think you'll understand what I'm trying to convey. I do value freedom but in a different sense. By "true" freedom I mean the ultimate sense of freedom and happiness over the longest amount of time. The most "beneficial" one.

That's not freedom that's investment. 

The people I chose to follow you have no respect for? Is that God?

I mean I take him about as seriously as a mascot, but he is their brand label so essentially yes, in a collectivist sense. 

I don't like what he's about. 

I'm not talking about being dominated by the right dude. I'm talking about the enslaving power of responsibility and running your life and soul into the ground. 

What. 

Responsibility does not feel freeing it feels burdensome. I hate responsibility even over my own self. Being saved from my own wrong choices is better than preserving my pride.

So you... just don't want to have to think or do things for yourself, so that you can feel assured that you won't do regrettable things..? 

This kinda sounds like a numbing escape from past problems. 

You don't need this research to see how over reactive to fear conservatives are.

Study: Liberals and conservatives have different brain structures

Fear and Anxiety Drive Conservatives' Political Attitudes

1. Conservatives tend to focus on the negative

In a 2012 study, liberal and conservative participants were shown collages of both negative and positive images on a computer screen while their eye movements were recorded. While liberals were quicker to look at pleasant images, like a happy child or a cute bunny rabbit, conservatives tended to behave oppositely. They’d first inspect threatening and disturbing pictures—things like car wrecks, spiders on faces, and open wounds crawling with maggots—and would also tend to dwell on them for longer. This is what psychologists call a “negativity bias”. If you think about it, this makes a lot of sense. When attention is biased toward the negative, the result is an overly threat-conscious appraisal of one’s surroundings. Essentially, to many conservatives the world looks like a much scarier place. This would seem to explain why so many major conservative viewpoints tend to be rooted in irrational fears—like fear of the president, immigrants, Muslims, vaccinations, etc.

2. Conservatives have a stronger physiological response to threat

A 2008 study published in the journal Science found that conservatives have a stronger physiological response to startling noises and graphic images. This adds to a growing body of research that indicates a hypersensitivity to threat—a hallmark of anxiety. But why exactly would those that scare more easily tend to support conservative views? One social psychologist from the University of Central Arkansas, Paul Nail, has a pretty interesting answer: “Conservatism, apparently, helps to protect people against some of the natural difficulties of living. The fact is we don’t live in a completely safe world. Things can and do go wrong. But if I can impose this order on it by my worldview, I can keep my anxiety to a manageable level.” This could explain the two parties’ different stances on gun control. It only makes sense that those who startle more easily are also the ones that believe they need to own a gun.

3. Conservatives fear new experiences

A 2008 study catalogued items found in the bedrooms of college students and saw that while liberals owned more books and travel-related items, conservatives had more things that kept order in their lives, like calendars and cleaning supplies. This tells us that liberals more often seek adventure and novel experiences. Conservatives, on the other hand, seem to prefer a more ordered, disciplined lifestyle. This could help explain why they are so resistant to change and progressive policies.

4. Conservatives’ brains are more reactive to fear

Using MRI, scientists from University College London have found that students who identify themselves as conservatives have a larger amygdala than self-described liberals. This brain structure is involved in emotion processing, and is especially reactive to fearful stimuli. It is possible that an oversized amygdala could create a heightened sensitivity that may cause one to habitually overreact to anything that appears to be a potential threat, whether it actually is one or not. This disproportionate fear response could explain how, for example, Bush’s administration was able to gather wide public support amongst conservatives for invading Iraq. They knew if they said the phrase “weapons of mass destruction” enough times that it wouldn’t matter whether they really existed or not.

Now we see that empirical evidence tells us that conservatives and liberals don’t just have different outlooks and opinions. They also have different brains. This means that our choice of political affiliation and overall worldview may not really be all that much of a choice. Still, we must work to understand these psychological and biological distinctions so that we can ultimately use this knowledge to work better together and find middle ground. Such information may also make us less vulnerable to those who want to exploit these dispositions for their own selfish agendas, using tactics like fear mongering.

Furthermore, knowing why someone is the way they are helps us to be more tolerant and patient with one another. But we must also be honest about the situation. When important choices are being made based on gut instinct rather than logical reasoning, it is everyone’s responsibility to point this out so that it doesn’t result in catastrophe. And in a time when there actually are real threats present, like Ebola and ISIS, it is essential that we keep the paranoia at bay and a calm collectedness when making decisions.

Faethers said:

It's just acting upon your impulses without wisdom to your own downfall.

Ever read Ecclesiates? 

Ecclesiates said:

Wisdom Is Meaningless

I, the Teacher, was king over Israel in Jerusalem. 

I applied my mind to study and to explore by wisdom all that is done under the heavens. What a heavy burden God has laid on mankind! 

I have seen all the things that are done under the sun; all of them are meaningless, a chasing after the wind.

What is crooked cannot be straightened;
    what is lacking cannot be counted.

I said to myself, “Look, I have increased in wisdom more than anyone who has ruled over Jerusalem before me; I have experienced much of wisdom and knowledge.” 

Then I applied myself to the understanding of wisdom, and also of madness and folly, but I learned that this, too, is a chasing after the wind.

For with much wisdom comes much sorrow;
    the more knowledge, the more grief.

Ecclesiates said:

Wisdom and Folly Are Meaningless

Then I turned my thoughts to consider wisdom,
    and also madness and folly.
What more can the king’s successor do
    than what has already been done?

I saw that wisdom is better than folly,
    just as light is better than darkness.

The wise have eyes in their heads,
    while the fool walks in the darkness;
but I came to realize
    that the same fate overtakes them both.

Then I said to myself,

“The fate of the fool will overtake me also.
    What then do I gain by being wise?”
I said to myself,
    “This too is meaningless.”

For the wise, like the fool, will not be long remembered;
    the days have already come when both have been forgotten.
Like the fool, the wise too must die!

Feathers said: 

1. 144, 000 and interpretation variances and context.

I don't know what you're talking about. You mock religion all you want. You have cursed God all you wanted.

I'm not a witch, and even if I was it'd be wasted mana to cast spells at things that don't exist. 

I would be a Christian no matter where I was born. I was born in an atheistic type of raising. I didn't know about Christianity and I said "I will not worship a God unless he has a family. I could only trust a God who has a family because it shows character. I would still consider them if that family member died". That already rules out many religions. One's where God does not have a son are out of the picture.

Heaven having an occupancy of 144, 000 people? I think you presume to understand revelations which is an extremely symbolic book. 

It's a very straight forward number, and they go on to describe how those 144,000 are basically like God's Barons. They basically are like commanders for God's larger flock left on Earth. Earth meanwhile will basically have everyone who ever died EVER come back to life at the exact same time (nevermind the space constraints, the Bible writers didn't understand the scale of the Earth yet, so it's an easy mistake for the human authors to make), then each is individually judged and slain while God and Jesus are literally sitting on this now massively overcrowded Earth. After that Jesus is supposed to slay every false leader, destroy concepts that make people unhappy, and then once he has slain DEATH ITSELF they will reshape the Earth into a new Garden of Eden and then return to Heaven with everything... err... "fixed". 

Heaven is only meant for the elite, while New Earth/Eden mk. 2 with all problems ever eradicated is essentially what's promised in the texts. 

So yeah, you likely won't go to Heaven, but Eden mk. 2's cool too right? 

Also, a thing I cannot stand: Picking and choosing when to take passages literally versus figuratively. If it's not either all or nothing it's interpretive hogwash that just plays on one's selfishly interpreted variant. 

Do you take it all as symbolism, or do you just pick and choose to help it fit your worldview? 

2. Satan.

I'm not sure why you sympathize with Satan. He's the most anti body positive person ever... Here I thought you were pro body positivity.

Body positivity has nothing to do with this..? 

> Satan fell because he Become prideful because of beauty and thought himself superior to everyone.

What's more human than that? Satan has the ability to make mistakes, like we can, unlike God who literally has no free will at all. 

How am I supposed to relate to something essentially timeless and omnipresent? You just can't. By seeing all of time at once, he essentially made all of his choices at once. How can anyone sympathize with such inhuman alien concepts? Even the notion of "God's Love" is creepy as shit based on his requirements for it. 

Ezekiel 28:17 Your heart was proud because of your beauty; you corrupted your wisdom for the sake of your splendor. I cast you to the ground; I exposed you before kings, to feast their eyes on you. 

Beauty can be found in literally anything. 

Are you... connecting sympathy with Satan to body shaming because he looked too good for God to feel safe keeping him around? 

Isaiah 14:12-14 “How you are fallen from heaven, O Day Star, son of Dawn! How you are cut down to the ground, you who laid the nations low! You said in your heart, ‘I will ascend to heaven; above the stars of God I will set my throne on high; I will sit on the mount of assembly in the far reaches of the north; I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most High.’ 

I see nothing wrong with someone having a dream, especially considering how much of an artist he's been represented as at points. 

Ego in the arts is often how something great comes into being. Without such ego we'd just be empty doormats waiting to be told what to do, there'd be no individuality at all without the ego. 

> God is pro all body types and is body positive. 

Well yeah, why would a robot care about that sort of thing? 

1 Samuel 16:7 But the Lord said to Samuel, “Do not look on his appearance or on the height of his stature, because I have rejected him.

This sounds super petty. 

Isaiah 53:2 For he [Christ who is the son of God] grew up before him like a young plant, and like a root out of dry ground; he had no form or majesty that we should look at him, and no beauty that we should desire him. 

Clearly Isaiah was not an artist, and does not understand the pleasure of aesthetic. 

Genesis 29:31 When the LORD saw that Leah was not loved [because of her looks], he enabled her to conceive, but Rachel remained childless. 

It's so outdated to act like life's just about bearing children. 

Proverbs 31:30 Charm is deceptive, and beauty is fleeting; but a woman who fears the LORD is to be praised.

I can never get over their uses of the word "fear"...

"Fleeting" though, everything's fleeting. All we have is "the moment". 

So... Is he still lovely to you?

How was this supposed to change my mind..? 

I've read some of these already, but what am I supposed to do, just take the Bible at face value about the dude? The book is literally written by a group that hates Satan. It's got to be biased as fuck, as God didn't even want people looking at the dude. 

There's very clear bias against him, and I don't think it gives Satan much of a fair representation. If we were to assume the Christian paradigm was real, when you attempt to separate the bias from the texts you get a surprisingly sympathetic character. 

He is worse than Palepeach.

Well damn, what ever happened to "Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself"?

Now if you found her appalling how much more should you be appalled by someone who want to destroy and rule just because he's beautiful?

See, that's not fair. If his only talent was being beautiful he'd be of no threat to anybody. 

He's very talented, clever, artistically inclined, and is a natural born historian. He's cultured as fuck, and much smarter than just one who succeeds through one's vanity.