Lews Therin

I didn't know tagging was common courtesy, sorry about that. But you did write almost a full paragraph of different psychological models with essentially no elaboration other than a link to a 5 page long body language mega thread. And no, i can't count that as language because i don't know your credentials on body-laguage reading nor do i understand body language well enough to judge if what you are saying makes sense or not. Also, i don't consider bodily cues to be informative enough to deduce as much information as you seem to have. Yeah, maybe the body can tell you if the person is nervous, but is it because they are lying or is it because they of a miriad of other possible reasons? So, what about stages of cognitive development makes you think he is untrustworthy? What about ego development (by Jane's model) makes you think he is untrustworthy? What about Myers Brigs personality types makes you think he is untrustworthy? What about life experiences (his or yours?) makes you think negatively of him? What about "other lines of development from life to societal domains, ideological beliefs indoctrinated" gives you that opinion about him? Or any of the other stuff you mentioned? You can't just come in here, drop the name of a dozen different models and not elaborate on any. Also, a body-language thread is not "elaboration" since i doubt anyone in this world can tell someone's stage at different developmental lines just from looking at how they move and how they sit.

"I agree that Destiny is a skilled debater, but due to various developmental factors like stages of development, cognitive and moral development, personality types and traits(Big five personality traits and Myers Briggs personality types modal), ego development(by Jane Loevinger),life experiences and other lines of development from life to societal domains, ideological beliefs indoctrinated, and self biases and preferences I feel that Destiny is dangerous and should not be trusted or blindly believed. Success, charisma, persuasion /=/ personal growth or moral character." Damn, i got so tired in the middle of this i almos gave up on reading, you literally cited every single psychology related thing you of in order to character assassinate an youtube streamer, and of of the few that does a good work for society.

Prime quality content from Dr. K, video that could have been straight from here. Although i have to say the video itself was too edited to feel comfortable to watch, but i guess it makes sense for him to try different formats from time to time.

No, he is very clearly not pedophilic, his content, it seems, is going way over your head. That's not why he was banned, inform yourself before making claims about people, you clearly don't know enough about the subject to be going around making a topic to "expose" him. He was banned because a video he posted long ago and that was already age restricted had excerpts of nudity from a film, that video was flagged during the mass-flagging by nick fuentes, a literal white nationalist. If his thoughts make YOU feel disturbed, perhaps it is you who should be looking inside to find out why some part of feels that way.

"Notice how you erroneously assume the default position is environmental factors." No i am not. I am not assuming anything, i am explaining to you how to make a case for what you are defending. That is not even my position. At no point i assumed there was a "default" position, i don't have to make assumptions because i am not the one making claims, other than "we can't know for sure" You are the one making a claim "Black people are genuinely intellectually inferior". Therefore, in order to substantiate your claim, you need something more than what you have so far offered which was: "It would follow that..." "would it not be extraordinarily obvious..." and "But I don't' believe that accounts..." Essentially the problem is that, as you said you don't BELIEVE the environmental factor explain this question, but you also can't seem to provide any evidence, all you have is this belief.

You said you wanted a productive and scientific discussion, if that is the case, stop repeating over and over that there is a genetic difference between races IN GENERAL and find some evidence that points that the specific gap in IQ between black and white people is genetic, or that it can't for some specific reason be attributed entirely to environmental factors IN THIS CASE.

Let's dissect what you are saying so we get to where our gap in understanding lies. Propositions: p1: there is a genetic component to inteligence - I believe most people here agree on this. p2: Different races have different levels of inteligence - I prefer to say ethnicities, as race is not a scientific concept, and you claim to want to have a scientific conversation. As someone mentioned before, there is more genetic difference between different groups of "black people" than between most people of different "races". That said, there PROBABLY are differences in inteligence. p3: Black people tend to score lower on IQ tests and other inteligence related tests - This is true and has been observed in a variety of studies. p4: The gap in IQ or general inteligence between races (p3) can't be solely due to historical, social and cultural factors and probably has to do with genes (p1 and p2) - Here you need to provide some evidence. Accepting p1 and p2 as truth doens't mean they have any connection to p3. As Leo said, it may very well be that after we equalize social and cultural factors black people start scoring higher than both white people and east asians on these tests. This conversation is essentially worthless untill you provide some evidence that can connect p1 and p2 to p3. As of right now, we KNOW that historical, social, and cultural factors have a GREAT DEAL of influence on black people scoring lower on these tests (and also their countries having lower GDP), and we have NO REASON to believe that these factor aren't responsible for 100% or more of the difference in IQ. As the person who made the initial claim, now it falls on you to provide evidence on that missing link and demonstrating WHY social factors can't explain the gap in inteligence.

Yeah, i am too sometimes, i feel completely powerless, as of right now, even if Lula wins there is a chance this ultra-conservative congress will actually control the country if Lula can get the "big-center" on his side. And it's crazy, my best friend (who is the personification of Stage Orange), seems to be changing his mind to vote blank in the second round, even after spending the last 2 years saying if the second round was Bolsonaro vs The Literal Devil, he would vote for the Devil since he believed Bolsonaro was to blame for the death of his uncle who had covid right before the vaccines arrived. I ended up voting for Lula in the first round (though very dissapointed with myself), since i didn't want another month of Auxilio Brasil to go through before the final decision is made. Now, if Lula wins, we need to start to think on who is going to be the Left's candidate in the next election, cause Lula is getting older and weaker by the day.

you really think it would go like that? i have more hope than you then... I was thinking about doing it with a focus less on people, and more on ideas, so though not completely avoiding mentioning politicians, option to avoid mention when possible.

as much as i like Ciro i don't think he is tier 2 either... But regardless, i think it would be cool to form a group to discuss brazilian politics and brazilian problems, if you guys are also interested in it.

@Recursoinominado resentment, inflexibility and excessive pride i can agre on, but lack of wisdom seems overreaching and dishonest discourse is more something that could be said about PT acting all lefty and then siding with the banks than anything that could be ever said about Ciro the bottom line is, is it better to have someone with a plan, but questionable capacity to execute said plan, or someone has shown to have sway over th system, but has no plan and has consistently shown to have no intention of having a plan at all?

@Leo Palhano "I understand this is a biased view, based upon overindulgence and trust in brazilian journalism which, again, is controlled by five bourgeoisie families" - This is the vibe i get from watching uncut interviews of him, nothing to do with media manipulation "It is undeniable that he was the most successful brazilian leader in history for 99% of the population" - Not even close to Getúlio Vargas. The very fact that the coup managed to reverse most of what he did shows that. Neolibs are to this day trying to undo the works GV did 70 years ago. "This is yet another result of 2016's coup d'etat." - Not true, it was a proccess that acceleretated due to the coup, but that was in progress waaaay before that with the loss of industrial capacity. If the industry shrinks, no labour laws in the world can keep a healthy level of employment. "Not Lula's or PT's fault, but our bourgeoisie, military and USA's. Again, no President, including Ciro if he ever was, has the power to go against our status quo. And the status quo wants Brazil as a big, colonial farm which poses no threat, technologically and industrially, to the global north. The status quo wants a passive middle and lower class so that they can keep secretly ruling and indulging their stolen riches through generations in the second most unequal country of the world. Lula tried to do the best he could within the limits of 1988's Constitution and how our politics really work." - While i agree that some powerfull sector of our economy try tu push that, i find it very weird to say Lula has no fault when he didn't make ANY effort to push back on that and instead allied himself with those very sectors that seek to loot the country. "But right now, considering the numbers of voters' intentions and the complexity of the current elections because of Bolsonaro's fascism and power over the institutions, if you're not voting for Lula in the first round, you're effectively helping Bolsonaro to have a chance in the second round." - If the only way of keeping Bolsonaro away from the power is sacrificing my integrity, then perhaps he really was chosen by the universe for some weird reason. Lula's government is a regressive government as well, not to the same extent as bolsonaro, but he is also giving up on our sovereignty in exchange for having cheap products in our markets for a temporary ammount of time. All in all my view is this. Lula wants the poor to be able to buy stuff, but he is either incapable of seeing or simply does not care that as long as we have to buy those things from foreigners, those conquests will never be secure and these other countries will be able to make us beg and crawl for it whenever they want. He had a approval raiting as high as any leader could hope to have and did nothing to build an industry that ccould give actual security to those in need. The bottom line is that anyone who isn't Bolsonaro will buy us some time relative to how fast our country's collapse would be with him on power. That said, they both propose the same path, the path of dependency, a path that leads only to enslavement or collapse. Who wins, Lula or Bolsonaro, is completely irrelevant if a new project doesn't start gaining momentum for the long term. Therefore, giving support and attention to anyone who talks about that (only candidate who does is Ciro), is the only course of action that has any hope of keeping our people and our forests in any semblance of healthyness till capitalism ends.

@Leo Palhano For the life of me i can't see Lula engaging with anyone from a "tier 2 perspective" he screams stage Blue louder than anyone i have ever seen. He is essentially the personification of stage Blue for that matter. And yes, i do know all the numbers you quoted, and i think he had many good numbers in different areas, and was probably above the average brazilian president. That said, a country is in many ways defined by it's productive structure, there is a reason marx would never say russia was ready for socialism/communism. The mode of production of a country is what defines how far conscience can rise in said country. You will not see stage Orange flourish in a tribal environment, much less stage green or yellow. The same can be said for tier 2 in a feudalistic society. Don't get me wrong, having black people go to uni as much as white people is great, but it doesn't mean nearly as much as it seems if both of them are going to work as uber drivers after getting their engineering degree. And During Lula's government it wasn't that our productive matrix didn't advance, it objectively regressed, and regressed a lot. That means that even if there are more people with enough study to manifest higher levels of consciousness, they won't manifest it because the environment is not conductive for it. Industry is the basis for stages Orange and higher to flourish, when Lula sacrificed our industry to get support from the financial and extractivist sectors, our society lost the capcity to shine in ways that had taken decades to emerge, and i won't even talk about the hit to our sovereignty in this post. Without Industry there is no room for growth, that's why our only hope would be to have a president that is 100% bought in to the idea of developing the national industry. because withou that solid base, stage blue will never be able to mature and give rise to the higher emerging aspects of humanity. I think Ciro is by far the best choice we have, do i think he has a chance? hell no, maybe not even if both Bolsonaro and Lula died, but he certainly has my vote on the first round. And let's hope you are right and Lula wins in the end, i'm not very optimistic as of right now.

This. Styling yourself as a "conservative" means having an ego about it, identifying yourself with the idea of conservating something. Being against some stuff that most progressives say doesn't make you a conservative, only your own attachment to a label can do that.

@Leo Palhano I agree with you analysis of the events, 90%, but disagree with your comparison between Lula and Ciro. I agree that Ciro is very resentfull of Lula, but i can easily see why that happened. Lula parades as a hero of the country's poor people, but in truth he just FHC with a beard. True national sovereignty comes from a country being able to produce what it needs and not being forced to buy it from others that will set outrageous prices for it. Here is a graph of Brazil's industry representation to the GDP, : (Look at image) Lula's government butchered our industry in favour of the agro-business, environmental destructive practices like strong extractivism (Vale for example) and banking. The numbers are there for anyone to see. ------------------------------------------------------------------- Yes, Bolsa-família was great, but anyone who says Lula brought Structural changes (@Recursoinominado ) to the country is delusional, during his government most of our capacity to exist as an independent country dissipated. And that's one of the main reasons Ciro get's so angry when people act like Lula is a hero for our country. Ciro is not by any means perfect, but he at least proposes to bring changes to our productive structure, something Lula didn't even attempt when he had an approval rating of 80%. Lula thought if he played the game the elites wanted him to play, they would let him do it, begginers mistake, got sidesteped and is now going to very likely lose to Bolsonaro. ------------------------------------------------------------------- Also, @Leo Palhano What's your basis to say "Lula is way higher in the spiral compared to Ciro"?? To me it seems pretty clear our election is as follows: Bolsonaro - Solid Red Lua - Solid Blue Ciro - blue/Orange Unfortunatelly, despite @Hugo Oliveira's claims, there is no Green of any relevance in our system as of now, Dilma maybe had a little of it, and so did Haddad, and that's why none of them had real chances of bonding with the general poppulace. Lula is as popular as he is because he is as Blue as they come, and so is most of the country. That's why loads of people who voted for Lula in the past ended up voting for Bolsonaro in 2018, he was the next closest thing spiral-wise, just one stage bellow.

@Ulax You mean the seduction subreddit?

Sorry about reviving the thread, but has anyone checked if this is legit?

I would have that in a t-shirt.

frustrated by your own ignorance it seems.

@hello1234 "I don’t understand how russians can believe in this stuff" This would be a good point to start. If you don't understand how they can believe that, try to learn and understand. It surely ain't impossible.

And you should do the same, Ttachi at least seems open to others possibilities, your posts on the other russian thread were straight up a demonization campaign.

i haven't heard it all yet, but i think the validity of that perspective in no way means "This conflict is not primarily geopolitical". It is just like the US, their wars all have geopolitical goals behind them, but the idea of american exceptionalism facilitates and provide a moral framework for justifying the geopolitical decisions, same thing with Russia

True, my brother was being annoying, so i stole his iq points while he slept. Next day they kicked him out of uni and invited me to take his place. They also gave me money. Seriously though, it helps you to do practical stuff, which means that society will perceive you as more valuable. That said it is not a final answer on how much you can contribute. It has absolutely nothing to do with wisdom, so someone with a high iq can easily spent their life doing something useless very well. I read one article one time that said Darwin was considered by many intelectuals ho knew him to not be a very smart/fast thinking guy, but who was able to compensate that by having very good methods of aquiring knolledge. He would write down any idea he had and the arguments in favour, and then write the arguments against and try to go really far on them. I don't know how much of that is true, but it carries well the idea that intelignce without wisdom doesn't mean much. It also is probably somewhat irrelevant in term of spirituality. In my life it has been the basis of my ego as it started to develop and leave the "conformist stage", i'm not a genius who does everything easily, but am smart enough to have the respect of my peers without having to do much effort. In part because of that i became somewhat lazy in many regards, wich i am trying to fix. In others, it made me confident enough to dream high on my goals, how that will turn out in the end, we will see.

@How to be wise True, but you said he critiqued Orange from above, which would imply he is at green, which is just a no no. Also, i didn't say he was Bue, i said he was Blue/orange. The whole debatelord personna that made him famous is a orange trait, but he uses it to defend tradition and his InGroup, which are both Blue values. He has lots of orange in him, but his main drive is the defence of conservative values and conservative groups/institutions. He has also many times said we should "just kill" Fidel Castro, Nicolas Maduro and others. This people weren't judge or condemned, and Orange values a lot the adequate procedures. He wants them killed because they are "enemy group". SO even though he has many low Orange traits, he is far away from peak Orange.

@How to be wise Of course he talks about it. His whole persona revolves around resisting green, and so does that of his whole audience. But he definetely doesn't do it from above, as much as you would like to think that. The whole culture wars is essentially a Blue values vs Green values thing, with Orange siding sometimes with one, sometimes with the other, but in most cases siding with Blue since they also are resisting Green. Ben is on the Blue side.