Basman

Humans are the only animals that strive to be more than just animals.

One thing you need to keep in mind with social media is that it is designed to demotivate you. Less so with self-help material to a certaint extent because it is meant to inspire and teach you. But all social media wants to keep you engaged and keep you clicking. self-help is about internalizing concepts and ideas the help improve your life. There is a difference between a concept being taught and that concept being integrated into your life. You will forget most it, hence why Youtubers like Infinite Waters basically just reiterate the same points and concepts endlessly. Goals are fundamental to any self-help, so it would help to clarify them to yourself and break down exactly what actions you need to take concretely in detail.

I have a relative with a soda addiction and it is not good. Not only is it wrecking their gum line to the point they have to get expensive dental treatment to fix it (despite being good at brushing) it is also just expensive. The expense of daily soda adds up quick. I sometimes deposit all of the bottles that are left after a month or so and it is enough money to pay for a week's worth of groceries. And that is just a fraction of the money spent on those drinks. I don't think it is worth it. I highly recommend anyone addicted to soda to get of it. Even if you just replace it with some other sugary crap, atleast if it is less acidic as well as cheaper than regular soda, then you are making an improvement. Some ideas are tea with generous amounts of honey. Then you are also getting some caffeeine. Or even simpler, just pour sugar into a cup of water.

The term "nuclear family" was coined around that time. The two parent relationship isn't an "invention" or an "experiment". Its a fundamental building block of any family that goes back generations. Changes to family structure that you see in the west the last century or so are more like adaptations to circumstance. You are using the word "experiment" flippantly as if there is someone who is willing these grand social changes into being in some cruel fashion. There is no evil mastermind. There was no need to, hence no such term existed back then. This doesn't say anything about the concept itself.

The nuclear family system was very efficient IMO back when nearly everybody was a farmer. Post industrialization, it made less sense, but you are also pointing to a relatively short time of (western) history. People have been farmers and living in tight-knit commmunites for about 7000 years.

Women are definitely the more socially intelligent part of the species. Social cohesion is a strenght of theirs. There is a reason for why women tended to be housewifes traditionally, not just because they had wombs and birthed babies. That housewife role was a very effective division of labor and resource management in a nuclear family system. Women tend to be better at managing social resources whereas men tend to be better at managing physical resources. A lot of social work is female dominated whereas you will find very few women working within construction. Consequently, men (or boys, if you will) have a lot to gain from putting in an effort to learn social skills. Men are much more likely to be loners/recluses and simply not need or want a bunch of social connection. That makes it easier to have originial thought, as pointed out in an earlier post in this thread. Men tend to be islands as opposed to waves. Men have an advantage in developing a skill, which is foundational to success. Men can get obsessive with a thing at the detriment of everything else. Many women could benefit from learning how to prioritize and focus. It is worth noting the economical aspect of feminism in that it is no longer really viable for most people to have a single provider. It is not just that women have a lot more opportunity today, it is a necessity of modern society IMO.

I'd argue that there really isn't such a thing as a completely healthy social media. Anonymity will always result in people being a bit dickish on average and more transparent in their love of drama. But it never becomes overly toxic and circlejerky like Reddit. You can disagree on things here and even hold some edgy less than socially-accepted opinions and you'll be fine as long as you don't take it too far. It is a good forum to have some genuine discussions on how the world works or how to improve your specific issues, and people are very much willing to help given the chance. Use the forum as a tool but don't take it too seriously.

If you think life is too comfortable, you might just be bored and lack interesting challenge in your day-to-day.

Ask someone in charge.

You don't really need to convince anyone of your beliefs. Just let people be. If they find this kind off self-help and spirituality stuff interesting, then they'll be receptive to it. No need to push. Keep in mind that this kind of self-help and spirituality is quiet western. Stealing money from your parents in order to buy a self-help product is obviously a bad idea. It'll lead to resentment and accusations of you being brainwashed. Why would you do that to your own parents (you or your friend, that is)? I'd advice to wait till your situation is more stable and that you have some money on the side before you invest in expensive products. There's more than enough free material on the internett to keep you going for years and years.

They are probably on steroids. I'm talking about being athletic. Not a the Rock-tier hulk monster. Being athletic makes you healthier and less likely to suffer from heart disease. Steroids for the purpose of getting girls is a bad idea. The side effects alone makes it a bad idea but girls aren't attracted to the uber vascular, roided up beasts anyway. When I talk about being muscular as a guy, I mean being fit and having a toned and defined body. That is something any guy can achieve.

Muscle tone is a sign of health and therefor attractive. But there is also the difference of having built up trust with the guy.

Women in general tend to be more fearful than men. There is a bunch of research and articles on it if you look it up. Fearfulness and being withdrawn is tied to a certain extent to physical strength and women are generally smaller and weaker than men. You can imagine yourself standing next a 1000kg male bull. The size difference can excastebates timidness and the need for security.

You can't really blame them though if they are seemingly not given the opportunity to accultarate and are seen as outsiders despite being born in France. Radicalism as a consequence then is due to a lack of percieved opportunity and relief from tension. This whole mess seems to be the result of neglect spanning decades. Whether or not Islam is incompatible with western values, I think it depends. Extremism and cult-like groups of any kind can be antithetical to democracy.

Life purpose is a bit of a loaded term in my opinion, but it alludes to a calling life. It can be beneficial to have a life purpose because it helps hit every base for what you want from your career and lifestyle. The best "job" you can get is one that is not only one that you find personally interesting but also makes a contribution to society that you find meaningful while being personalized to fit your values and proclivities. For example, Leo likes to contemplate, so he spends a lot of time alone and just contemplates. Then he communicates his ideas semi-regurarily. That is a heavily simplified example and probably somewhat innaccurate but none the less an example of a "life purpose" that is heavily personalized and for him fulfilling. A calling is also more flexible than a career, as there are many ways to skin a cat. If for example video went under, Leo could write a book instead (though probably not his prefered medium). Whereas if your job is disrupted, your just out of a job and got to find something new. A strong calling can simplify the process of deciding what you need to do in your career and life by making it very concise. Ultimately it is about living by your values. The idea that contribution makes your life more rich and meaningful underpins the concept.

The prolification of negative strawmanning is one of if not the worst side-effect of social media. The stark divide between left and right today is to a degree due to media outlets wanting to better cater to certain demographics. In that process, making the "opposite" side look bad legitimizes the need for the identity group being sold. It is cathartic to see people with views you disagree with be "fought". The general trend today is "if you express different views as me, you are a bad person", often said in a shaming and otracizing way. Character assassination and thought terminating cliches are rife in modern discourse which leads to greater polarization as discussion devolves into shouting matches. More extremes views are being fronted as the middle curve is being eroded by this need to market ideas based on the invalidity of opposing groups. Social media thrives of hyperbole and sensationalism for attention and illicits a tribalistic response in people, which naturally breaks down complex topics into the black & white. That can be problematic when the issues themselves are beyound what a simple meme or tweet can express. A lot of the points you see people make are simply parroted from somewhere else uncritically. there's a lack of critical thought and people simply want to "be right" instead of understand each other. This tribalistic mentallity is insufficient when we live in nations that hinge on the cooperation of a diverse array of people. There's no getting rid of the "leftist" or "right-wingers". You can only isolate yourself from them, which is basically what is happening online. Which is the futility of a polarized social media. Marketing forces and sensationalist media are in large part responsible for why political discourse is divisive and B&W.

You could get into miniature painting. It is a solitary activity that is easy to pick up whenever you have time and let go off at any stage. Unlike other hobbies like gaming, painting minis leave you with a finnished product, which is inherently more fulfilling. Miniatures also tend to hold their monetary value after you buy them, so you can always sell off your collection. It is not as hard as it may look to paint at such a scale. It just doesn't. It is time consuming though. And expensive. But not as expensive as certain other hobbies, like cycling, hunting or anything that involves motorized vehicles.

Sounds like you are just cramping up when meditating due to past injuries/weak and tense muscles. Perhaps you have overactive traps or some other muscle group, in particular on the left side. If certain muscle groups responsible for upholding a certain posture are weak then adjacent muscles tend to compensate, which can lead to pain. If I was you I would incorporate more movement in your week, like walking. Also do some strengthening exercise. If you have spinal issues you should go see a doctor. I have a structurally weak leg post-surgery which used to get a lot of tighness till I started doing strenghtening exercises, after which most hang-ups like that are gone completely.

People who cultivate a skill tend to be passionate about it. The passione and sense of reward holds you over the more tedious aspects. When I do my fitness, I look forward to the sense of fulfillment you get from putting effort into your body and the boost in confidence as my body visibly grows as well as a hearty meal afterwards. I have plenty of good reasons to work out and I don't work-out so much that it becomes too tedious. In fact, I probably work-out less per session than what would be considered a "normal" work-out typically. But I'm highly concistent since I enjoy the way I do it. I manage to work-out circa 5 times a weak, which I would never be able to do if I was forcing myself a high degree. I don't think you need to be particularily driven as a person in order to develop skills. You just need a genuine good reason and a pace that doesn't burn you out. I'd be concerned if you aren't genuinely interested in something for its own sake and trying to pursue something just because its a "good idea". I'm pursuing art and in this economy it is anything but a good idea. Your interest shouldn't be purely based on rationality but be emotionally inspiring. You are going to be bad at it in the start. That is normal.

I've grew up in Norway and I'm familiar with the culture. Norway is a country where nobody will sit next to you on the buss unless they have absolutely have to. They don't tend to socialize very openly with strangers compared to southern-European countries or the US. Keep in mind that pick-up is largely an American concept, which is a country where people more commonly openly socialize with strangers. It is not strange that the concept works less efficiently in other cultures. IMO, social circle is the way to go in Norway. If you are lucky and befriend someone who owns a boat, you can go sail around on the fjord during the summer and hang out. There's a lot of potential fun to be had that way. Learn to ski and enjoy hikes (or "tur" in Norwegian). Then you will have some interests that are extremely common in Norway, which you can relate over.

My impression as a European is that Americans are kind and outgoing people but as soon as something remotely political or controversial is brought up they get very combative and outspoken. Sometimes I have to remind myself that all the crazy political talk on social media is largely if not entirely an American thing. Its a little embarassing to be honest.

Black and white thinking is more simplistic, which is why people do it and why it spreads more easily. The human brain is the most energy demanding organ of the body. We are instinctually driven to preserve energy and conciously thinking about things is simply less energy efficient, which is why consciously thinking and contemplating things is relatively uncommon. You can deduce a lot from different situations and people if you just kind of pay attention and try to connect your observations in a meticilous fashion. It doesn't require the intellect of a geniues, just that you try. Most people rarely really "think" about stuff or ask a lot of questions. Atleast consciously in a deliberate way.

I believe men tend to reject women with high bodycounts for various reasons when looking for a long-term monogamous relationship. A high bodycount can indicate that they are less reliable and stable in a long-term relationship. It makes sex less intimate and special if you are just another body. It decreases the odds of STDs. Why virginity matters specifically to someone, it could be a cultural thing where it is seen as virtuous. It could also be a fetish. Vice-versa, experience is attractive in men because it makes you more capable of being a good leader. It also indicates that past women found you attractive. A man being a virgin past a certain age can be seen as unattractive for the aforementioned reasons. I woulnd't really call it a double-standard as much as just a difference for why it is less acceptable for women to have a high bodycount compared to men (though culture can definitely reinforce certain attitudes). Men can't get pregnant and therefor women have much more to gain by being selective. It be the other way around if men got pregnant instead.

Actually, humans are its own genus called Homo. There used to be multiple species of humans existing at once, but us Sapiens are the only surviving species. At one point there where nine species of humans existing on the planet at the same time. We humans tend to take for granted that we are the only living species of our genus. Humans are classed as Hominids though, the family that includes all the great apes, so it is correct that humans are primates. But humans are a different branch to the other brances that include Chimps and gorillas, on the bigger branch that are hominids. One thing that is interesting to point out is that humans are the only generalist species out of the surviving hominids. Every other species is habitat dependent and endangered as a result, no thanks to us. Perhaps these species of great apes survived the rise of humans while every other human species didn't because they weren't in direct competition due to being specialized to a certain kind of habitat not suitable for farming. But now that humans do more than just farm and are encroaching on their habitat finally, their specialist tendencies are making them susceptible to extinction. Humans have a long history of annihilating other species long before any advanced technology existed. Sorry, you spiked my interest in human taxonomy and ancient history and I couldn't resist.

With the rise of students using ChatGPT to cheat on their assignments, I've been thinking about the nature of cheating relative to learning as a principle. I believe that you can't cheat learning on a fundamental level (no?) because cheating is to circumvent the learning process all together. By cheating, you are finding a way of not doing the work required by your tutors while making them think you have, I.E. trick them into thinking you you've done your homework. In the real world, if you want to do something you don't know how to do, you have to learn. And there is no "cheating" that learning. You either learn or you don't. There is no one to trick. School, you can cheat because on a fundamental level you are fulfilling the expectations of someone else, an institution, -who's interests you may or may not percieve as being alligned with your own. If you are a dumbass kid, you might feel like school sucks and is boring. Why not cheat? The issue I'm getting at is that cheating seems to be the result of learning being facilitated by a beurocratic system (school) that only recognizes learning as fulfilling certain criteria. Handing in your assignments and doing standardised tests. Cheating is inherently a result of how the system itself functions. Cheating is essentially a symptom of a flaw within the system. Your being graded on the work you hand in. The fact that you are being "graded" at all. Grades aren't a property of learning but of a system that tries to facilitate it. What ChatGPT highlights is how our current way of learning is insufficient. The problem is that a lot of our emphasize is on reproducing information. The reproduction of information is increasingly becoming an obsolete with technology. In a sense, I think it is good news that ChatGPT is ruining how schools have been doing things. They are in a sense forced to teach in a way that is more true to the principle of learning, which can't be cheated. I do appreciate however that it is a challenge to somehow facilitate learning on a national scale for millions of children and adults and somehow make it concistent. I'll give that school is good at teaching you to read and write and add 2+2. I believe a better financial situation for education is a low hanging fruit for improvement. I'm not particularily knowledgable about the education system but it is something I've been thinking about for years, how it operates currently relative to true learning. It is no joke that we forget the majority of what we "learn" through out school besides the bare basics. It's more a process of socialization more than anything else in my experience. What are your thoughts on the matter?