Hello Friend,

If this is your first visit to SoSuave, I would advise you to START HERE.

It will be the most efficient use of your time.

And you will learn everything you need to know to become a huge success with women.

Thank you for visiting and have a great day!

Porn is named as the cause of rape in India

ImTheDoubleGreatest!

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jun 14, 2014
Messages
5,781
Reaction score
2,977
Age
25
Location
Right behind you
Just to end the discussion here that porn causes rape—that’s complete and utter bull****. If it were true, the US would have far worse cases of rape and sexual abuse than any other country in the world because we watch more porn than any other country in the world. By far. Most of the poor folks in India don’t even have internet lmfao only the rich do. And the rich aren’t exactly out raping anyone because they can afford expensive dowries for when they marry, meaning they are actually ABLE to marry more easily than the poor.

/thread
 

Epicenter

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jun 10, 2020
Messages
1,002
Reaction score
376
Age
53
You got that completely reversed bro. Countries didn’t like to start wars because they had too many men, rather they liked to have men because they had too many wars. Female infanticide was VERY common throughout history, and it’s because men could just simpl do more. But from a strictly biological standpoint, male babies have higher mortality rates than female babies because they’re just weaker biologically (for pretty much the first year of life, give or take).
Yes true but you had cases like in Europe because of technology the numbers of people got huge. The problem is young males did not get enough land oppurtunities and they had to go outside. Women were I guess easier to integrate as they were more agreeable.

So it is good from one perspective that porn distracts people from making babies

Besides social pressure and some necessities like war people made babies because they were bored then natural instinct kicks in
 

ImTheDoubleGreatest!

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jun 14, 2014
Messages
5,781
Reaction score
2,977
Age
25
Location
Right behind you
you had cases like in Europe because of technology the numbers of people got huge
What are you talking about? Europe has a far smaller population than less developed countries. The West has a far lower population than the East.
Besides social pressure and some necessities like war people made babies because they were bored then natural instinct kicks in
This is so narrow-minded. No, they did not have babies because they were bored, that’s just ridiculous. People had babies because collectivism makes life easier. It was essentially their insurance for when they got old so that they’d have someone to take care of them. Not because they were “bored”. Life was too hard to feel boredom, like what...?
 

Epicenter

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jun 10, 2020
Messages
1,002
Reaction score
376
Age
53
What are you talking about? Europe has a far smaller population than less developed countries. The West has a far lower population than the East.

This is so narrow-minded. No, they did not have babies because they were bored, that’s just ridiculous. People had babies because collectivism makes life easier. It was essentially their insurance for when they got old so that they’d have someone to take care of them. Not because they were “bored”. Life was too hard to feel boredom, like what...?

I was talking about Europe after the 18th century. Europe exported males to USA, Latinamerica and so on

No life was not always too hard. I guess in the long winters indoors you might get bored and do some boom boom.

In SEA for example I guess life was never really hard at all. They don't have a winter. They had plenty of time sex becomes then a hobby.

Mostly it's boredom:
---
In 1654, scientist and philosopher Blaise Pascal wrote: “All of humanity's problems stem from man's inability to sit quietly in a room alone.” Now, there's some science behind that statement.
--
 

ImTheDoubleGreatest!

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jun 14, 2014
Messages
5,781
Reaction score
2,977
Age
25
Location
Right behind you
I was talking about Europe after the 18th century. Europe exported males to USA, Latinamerica and so on

No life was not always too hard. I guess in the long winters indoors you might get bored and do some boom boom.
Ummm, still no lmao. Bro, since the Black Death, Europe has pretty much always had much lower fertility rates than the rest of the world, they actually have declining birth rates right now in most countries, and the only thing that saved them from economic collapse was, surprisingly enough, the immigration crisis.

And life there pretty much was always hard until the industrial revolution (except during the golden age of Rome for Western Europe, and golden age of Byzantium for Eastern Europe). While I understand that kids did happen because people got bored, that’s well in the minority of cases.
Mostly it's boredom:
---
In 1654, scientist and philosopher Blaise Pascal wrote: “All of humanity's problems stem from man's inability to sit quietly in a room alone.” Now, there's some science behind that statement.
There is absolutely NO science behind that, it’s simply an opinion lmao what are you talking about???? I could just as easily say the opposite and say it’s science. There are no logical deductions/inductions in that statement, no analysis for why he thinks that, and no evidence or reasoning at all.

But let’s assume it is science. If it were true, then there would be no such thing as a ‘golden age’ or ‘dark age’ or any point in history. They simply would never exist because times would be just as ****ty or awesome now as they were before. Why? Because men not being able to sit still doesn’t suddenly just go away for several hundred years and than spontaneously arise to cause the decline of civilization, that’s just bull****. You think that the Sassanids going through major political turmoil and social unrest and economic problems was due to men not being able to sit still? Or that the US going from an economic powerhouse in the 50s to the declines state it’s in today because men were able to sit still in 50s but now can’t? That’s the most insanely idiotic thing I’ve ever heard. That dude is a beta faggot. Just because he’s a ‘philosopher’ or ‘scientist’ doesn’t mean he’s smart. I’ve shit all over professors with doctorates in debates like this and left them scratching their heads. One even thanked me because he said I’ve given him some things to think about. He said he’d get back to me but never did lol.

Think outside the box more.
 

Epicenter

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jun 10, 2020
Messages
1,002
Reaction score
376
Age
53
Ummm, still no lmao. Bro, since the Black Death, Europe has pretty much always had much lower fertility rates than the rest of the world, they actually have declining birth rates right now in most countries, and the only thing that saved them from economic collapse was, surprisingly enough, the immigration crisis.

And life there pretty much was always hard until the industrial revolution (except during the golden age of Rome for Western Europe, and golden age of Byzantium for Eastern Europe). While I understand that kids did happen because people got bored, that’s well in the minority of cases.

There is absolutely NO science behind that, it’s simply an opinion lmao what are you talking about???? I could just as easily say the opposite and say it’s science. There are no logical deductions/inductions in that statement, no analysis for why he thinks that, and no evidence or reasoning at all.

But let’s assume it is science. If it were true, then there would be no such thing as a ‘golden age’ or ‘dark age’ or any point in history. They simply would never exist because times would be just as ****ty or awesome now as they were before. Why? Because men not being able to sit still doesn’t suddenly just go away for several hundred years and than spontaneously arise to cause the decline of civilization, that’s just bull****. You think that the Sassanids going through major political turmoil and social unrest and economic problems was due to men not being able to sit still? Or that the US going from an economic powerhouse in the 50s to the declines state it’s in today because men were able to sit still in 50s but now can’t? That’s the most insanely idiotic thing I’ve ever heard. That dude is a beta faggot. Just because he’s a ‘philosopher’ or ‘scientist’ doesn’t mean he’s smart. I’ve shit all over professors with doctorates in debates like this and left them scratching their heads. One even thanked me because he said I’ve given him some things to think about. He said he’d get back to me but never did lol.

Think outside the box more.

18th-century
… spurred by western Europe's tremendous population growth during the late 18th century, extending well into the 19th century itself. Between 1750 and 1800, the populations of major countries increased between 50 and 100 percent, chiefly as a result of the use of new food crops (such as the potato) and…

Population growth | biology | Britannica


----
sorry the "science" part was from a random dude who copied the quote.

Anyway you can make the argument that people sometimes work with their lizard brain more or vice versa.

For a civilized Star Trek utopia we need scientists to reach synchronity then machines can do the job and we can do some art.

Anyway to become a scientist you have to be able to work with your frontal cortex. That is hard to do. That is probably where this philosopher was heading to.

That is this guys idea to solve human mess we all should become scientists.

 

ImTheDoubleGreatest!

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jun 14, 2014
Messages
5,781
Reaction score
2,977
Age
25
Location
Right behind you
18th-century
… spurred by western Europe's tremendous population growth during the late 18th century, extending well into the 19th century itself. Between 1750 and 1800, the populations of major countries increased between 50 and 100 percent, chiefly as a result of the use of new food crops (such as the potato) and…
Population growth | biology | Britannica

----
sorry the "science" part was from a random dude who copied the quote.

Anyway you can make the argument that people sometimes work with their lizard brain more or vice versa.

For a civilized Star Trek utopia we need scientists to reach synchronity then machines can do the job and we can do some art.

Anyway to become a scientist you have to be able to work with your frontal cortex. That is hard to do. That is probably where this philosopher was heading to.

That is this guys idea to solve human mess we all should become scientists.

It has nothing to do with science because then you can justify eugenics and the altering of genes in embryos. I’d say it’s just morality. If people weren’t pieces of ****, then it doesn’t matter what form of government you have have because people would be honest and trustworthy and no wars or human-related catastrophes would have begun in the first place.
 

Epicenter

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jun 10, 2020
Messages
1,002
Reaction score
376
Age
53
It has nothing to do with science because then you can justify eugenics and the altering of genes in embryos. I’d say it’s just morality. If people weren’t pieces of ****, then it doesn’t matter what form of government you have have because people would be honest and trustworthy and no wars or human-related catastrophes would have begun in the first place.
Moralty is in general the abitlity to wait and have patience. Most people can not be without doing some negativ action. That is why sitting in the room by yourself can be a marker if you can keep a moral standard.

Most people are addicted to validation. It keeps one mostly on the reptilian brain level. Getting to the next step is harder.

Don't we have some form of eugenics already? Life of older people is less worth than of young people. Altering genes gets more and more normalized.



I
 

ImTheDoubleGreatest!

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jun 14, 2014
Messages
5,781
Reaction score
2,977
Age
25
Location
Right behind you
Moralty is in general the abitlity to wait and have patience. Most people can not be without doing some negativ action. That is why sitting in the room by yourself can be a marker if you can keep a moral standard.
The worst psychopaths on the planet have patience like that. It has nothing to do with patience really, it’s more so just not being a POS. That’s all that morality is lol

Don't we have some form of eugenics already? Life of older people is less worth than of young people. Altering genes gets more and more normalized.
Not even close lol
Most people are addicted to validation. It keeps one mostly on the reptilian brain level. Getting to the next step is harder.
I don’t see what this has to do with anything I said but humans are still social creatures. If you remove that, we all die out. You’ll find that there’s a step beyond that ‘step’ you’re talking about, and in the end, it’s valuing your relationships and interactions with others. You end up coming full circle because you realize that’s the only thing that matters in life (after God, of course).
 

Epicenter

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jun 10, 2020
Messages
1,002
Reaction score
376
Age
53
The worst psychopaths on the planet have patience like that. It has nothing to do with patience really, it’s more so just not being a POS. That’s all that morality is lol


Not even close lol

I don’t see what this has to do with anything I said but humans are still social creatures. If you remove that, we all die out. You’ll find that there’s a step beyond that ‘step’ you’re talking about, and in the end, it’s valuing your relationships and interactions with others. You end up coming full circle because you realize that’s the only thing that matters in life (after God, of course).
Higher morals come from the frontal cortex. Primitive darwinian morals come from the reptilian brain. A guy who can sit still has more control of this reptilian brain. It's the difference between the cavemen barbarian and civilized men.
 

ImTheDoubleGreatest!

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jun 14, 2014
Messages
5,781
Reaction score
2,977
Age
25
Location
Right behind you
Higher morals come from the frontal cortex. Primitive darwinian morals come from the reptilian brain. A guy who can sit still has more control of this reptilian brain. It's the difference between the cavemen barbarian and civilized men.
Having self-control doesn’t make you a good person just as being impulsive doesn’t make you a bad person. It’s just that one is usually associated with the other, but not always.
 

Epicenter

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jun 10, 2020
Messages
1,002
Reaction score
376
Age
53
That’s not true at all. If you think that, then you’ve just been indoctrinated too hard and can’t think outside the box.
Morals are complex. An impulsive person can not think deep to figure out in a certain environment. Even if he knows what is moral he can not act on it because he has no control of his emotions.

That is why Immanuel Kant was important. He worked on moral laws that has the chance to work for everybody not only for a tribe or individual.
 

mrgoodstuff

Master Don Juan
Joined
Aug 27, 2015
Messages
17,936
Reaction score
12,147
Location
DFW, TX
Having self-control doesn’t make you a good person just as being impulsive doesn’t make you a bad person. It’s just that one is usually associated with the other, but not always.
Right, a good manipulator or crook will have great self control.
 

ImTheDoubleGreatest!

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jun 14, 2014
Messages
5,781
Reaction score
2,977
Age
25
Location
Right behind you
Morals are complex. An impulsive person can not think deep to figure out in a certain environment. Even if he knows what is moral he can not act on it because he has no control of his emotions.
That is blatantly false. In an instance where an innocent starving dog is getting beat to death by its owner, an impulsive person would take a shovel and beat the everloving **** out of him. A person who has self-control would instead call the police and let the dog die due to the police not getting their in time, rather than directly intervene, because then stupid legalities would have you sent to prison for +10 years even though the owner was an asshole who deserved to get beat.

The more impulsive person in this scenario is (imo) more moral.

That is why Immanuel Kant was important. He worked on moral laws that has the chance to work for everybody not only for a tribe or individual.
That makes no sense. You’ve been saying this whole time to ‘transcend’ the “reptilian brain” in terms of morality but all of Kant’s work on the topic revolves around him saying that it’s something innate, that we are all born with a sense of morality on the most basic, primitive levels. That runs completely counter to what you were saying about higher morality coming from the prefrontal cortex.
 

Epicenter

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jun 10, 2020
Messages
1,002
Reaction score
376
Age
53
That is blatantly false. In an instance where an innocent starving dog is getting beat to death by its owner, an impulsive person would take a shovel and beat the everloving **** out of him. A person who has self-control would instead call the police and let the dog die due to the police not getting their in time, rather than directly intervene, because then stupid legalities would have you sent to prison for +10 years even though the owner was an asshole who deserved to get beat.

The more impulsive person in this scenario is (imo) more moral.


That makes no sense. You’ve been saying this whole time to ‘transcend’ the “reptilian brain” in terms of morality but all of Kant’s work on the topic revolves around him saying that it’s something innate, that we are all born with a sense of morality on the most basic, primitive levels. That runs completely counter to what you were saying about higher morality coming from the prefrontal cortex.
No the the guy would kill the dog owner because he has no self control. The guy with morals can do the right thing according to his thoughts on morals.
Impulsive people are regularly in prisons because they can not control themselves. They are like animals.

Kant came up with a moral law.
--
In Moral Law, Kant argues that a human action is only morally good if it is done from a sense of duty, and that a duty is a formal principle based not on self-interest or from a consideration of what results might follow.
--
Kant's improvement on the golden rule, the Categorical Imperative: Act as you would want all other people to act towards all other people. Act according to the maxim that you would wish all other rational people to follow, as if it were a universal law.
---

The reptilian brain, the oldest of the three, controls the body's vital functions such as heart rate, breathing, body temperature and balance. Our reptilian brain includes the main structures found in a reptile's brain: the brainstem and the cerebellum.
----

The frontal lobe is the part of the brain that controls important cognitive skills in humans, such as emotional expression, problem solving, memory, language, judgment, and sexual behaviors. It is, in essence, the “control panel” of our personality and our ability to communicate.
-----
The frontal lobe has to be trained to make him work properly. That is not an easy thing. That is why progression in morals and technology is slow.
 
Last edited:

mrgoodstuff

Master Don Juan
Joined
Aug 27, 2015
Messages
17,936
Reaction score
12,147
Location
DFW, TX
Right but at least he has the chance to do moral things because he has the abilities to do it. From there he can build upon it.
The crook or manipulator will do moral things in order to have a suitable image. Or to blend in. They will take you when they are safely able to.
 

Epicenter

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jun 10, 2020
Messages
1,002
Reaction score
376
Age
53
The crook or manipulator will do moral things in order to have a suitable image. Or to blend in. They will take you when they are safely able to.
Yes that is true. I am talking abut what is the condition to make you be able to have morals. The same condition can be basis to act against morals but that is not my point.
 
Top