Carl-Richard

Yes, as long as you want to survive at a baseline level (eating food, buying clothes, polluting, consuming electricity), you will probably contribute to the death of something or someone, and much of that is unavoidable, but it's indirect, statistical, butterfly effect type stuff. Now, pushing the button is something you can avoid, it is direct, not merely statistical, not butterfly effect type stuff. By actively making that choice, you're not aiming to rise above and improve the things that are currently unavoidable and harmful, but you're actively making it worse, which is a sin.

Alien Consciousness V2 - interview with a real alien from inside Area 51.

MeTuLL

I've always wondered why the fractal patterns or distortion effects (particularly the ones embedded in physical textures) look exactly the way they do or why they happen at all, but now I'm wondering why a substance would produce more mental imagery than other perceptual effects

About the Western canon, why an arbitrarily defined period like that should represent the development of music seems a bit reductionistic. String instruments have existed longer than keyboard instruments Besides, cross-pollination is a thing: Yngwie Malmsteen was heavily inspired by classical music, Allan Holdsworth wanted his guitar to sound like a saxophone (and Malmsteen adores Holdsworth; secondary cross-pollination 😊).

By saying "more" vs. "less", I'm implying a spectrum, not a dichotomy. I was making the point that he is exactly that brilliant combination of inspiration and culture. He made one video where he imitated some guitarists, but he is known for his improvisation.

Microenchephaly, like Beetlejuice. Small brain 😊

Yet you would also agree that people are prone to a lack of introspection, self-deception and inner conflict (and external pressures) which could obscure the ideal expression of their values. For example, if I was angry one day and hit somebody I love, that doesn't mean hitting people is something I particularly value. Same with answering questions like these.

Imagine judging brilliance by obscurity 😂 I know of even more obscure players who measure up to them and beyond. Are classical piano players who "study the Western canon" usually associated with improvisation? I think musical improvisation is just a particularly pure example of the type of inspiration I'm talking about. It can often work in tandem with structure and discipine quite brilliantly, and some of that is externally determined. But you have to be very careful to not let the external influences become too dominant, because that could kill the muse. That certainly applies more to less artistically creative pursuits (right-brained) and more intellectual pursuits (left-brained). You can notice when a guitar player has primarily "studied" themselves to learning the instrument vs. someone who has tapped into pure inspiration. Their playing becomes quite robotic, clumsy, unrefined, uninteresting (probably more the case for guitar than piano because of the differences in dynamics, e.g. bending). Still, it's always a balance, and it's actually possible to be highly inspired while also being highly cultured (Guthrie Govan has a video where he imitates like 20 guitar players almost identically). The trick is just to stay inspired.

Yngwie Malmsteen, self-taught, never practiced (has explicitly said that). Guthrie Govan, self-taught, never "practiced" (has said it doesn't "feel" like practice). When you're truly inspired, the most amazing things flow out of you effortlessly. Just trying to restore my faith in humanity.

Inspiration, which comes from within and can be negatively impacted by external pressures. When my guitar teacher got sick, we got a substitute teacher who was kind of like the teacher in Whiplash, and I quit going to lessons after that session. Another example: tell a musician to improvise under pressure. This thread is just me asking questions and seeing if people discover some inconsistency to their first answer to the question. Notice that I always qualified with "most people", "most likely", "probably". I'm not suggesting some universal morality.

🤢

But you would also help her across the road? Why? 🤔

But what if nobody would ever know you did it? Why? It's with the button, same as the original question, only that you helped her across the road once.

Yup. At some level, we're all immoral, biased, egocentric. It's just how far will you go? What kind of reasoning will you use?

I was just suggesting they may not have thought through the question.

No perfect moral agent exists, but things like that are difficult to think about and should only serve as motivation for seriously pursuing whatever you find most inspiring, beautiful and useful. Increasingly, yes, and probably yes. My current form is an absolute carebear, and it's only evolving.

In the question that was proposed, it's not just their life, but the likely suffering of their friends, family and community. It's in large part about the well-being of other people, not whether life should be protected at all costs. I don't know if this has been primed by the fact that I was recently in my uncle's funeral (a guy who I didn't get to know) and saw from a kind of outsider's perspective what the death of a person can do to a group of people (and also recently reconnecting with a part of my friend group who lost a friend to drug addiction 1 year ago), but I think I'm maybe able to connect with that aspect of the question a bit more than other people. And by the way, I'm not saying this doesn't apply to people in Gaza. It's just an observation of how people approach this specific question. I'm in luck because I'm aspiring to work with something related to mental health (hopefully primarily in the positive psychology sense, not the abnormal psychology sense), which I believe does save people from losing lives (prevents addiction, etc.), which improves the lives of people who are alive (increases meaning, etc.), and at some point will even stop wars from happening (yes). I'll be doing that in a way that supports myself financially and some day the people I will try to instill the same values as I have. I'll do this based on what I perceive to be my current calling or "dharma", judging by the experience of meaning and inspiration I feel towards it, which is a precious resource that has to be channeled the right way to be maximally useful. If I had experienced the same inspiration towards helping out in Gaza, I probably would've been there along with the other people who feel that way. Even if I had become something like a musician based on the same type of inspiration, that too would probably improve the lives of others in some way. Still, even if I was the same uninspired no-life I was a few years ago, I still probably wouldn't have pushed the button. And that says something, as I would even steal money from my family members. If you truly connect with the reality of the situation (which I believe many people aren't able to do), actively choosing to end someone's life for pure and utter financial gain is very bad.

When you're dead, what is the difference between your family members and a stranger? You don't see them, you don't feel them, and same with them. You're just a memory in their mind, like the stranger they saw on the street yesterday.

I actually didn't understand anything you just said, again. Would you help an old lady across the road, and would you nuke her for 100k?

I'm an ex-full-time stoner. What can I say? 😺

2-3 tablespoons of turmeric powder and 2-3 teaspoons of ground black pepper (inhibits cytochrome P450 from breaking down the curcumin in the turmeric) . It's a stimulant, antidepressant, antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, neuroprotective, antimicrobial, anticancer, helps metabolism. Taking too much may cause slight nausea.

I don't understand what you just said. Would you push the button if it was your kid but you've never met them (you only met the mom once, you never saw her again and they won't know it was you)?

Caused by you? Who caused you to exist? The universe. So nothing is caused by you in the grand scheme of things. Probably 99.9% of all people will forget about you 2-3 generations after your death. No trace of your name will ever be acknowledged ever. That is how insiginificant you are, yet you feel entitled to take another's life for 100k (I don't think you actually said that, but let's assume you did 😃). Weehooo. I guess they're right when they say ego is the source of all the world's problems ☺️

No, they're an epitaph of all life on Earth, of the whole universe, you psycho 😂 Nobody cares about you. You're an insignificant speck of lint on the penis of an alien (quoting Adrian Belew 😆; somehow "epitaph" primed King Crimson in my mind or something). Sure, let's say they're an epitaph of you because your tiny speck of genes (6.25%) is sloshing around inside the nucleus of their somatic cells. Why the fuck does that matter? My sperm is an epitaph of me. My dead skin cells are an epitaph of me. My shit is an epitaph of me. "No, I won't flush my shit even if you pay me 100k". I'm obviously making a mockery, but still.