/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15723454
Kill soientists. Behead soientists. Roundhouse kick a soientist into the concrete. Slam dunk a soientist baby into the trashcan. Crucify filthy soientists. Defecate in a soientists food. Launch soientists into the sun. Stir fry soientists in a wok. Toss soientists into active volcanoes. Urinate into a soientists gas tank. Judo throw soientists into a wood chipper. Twist soientist heads off. Report soientists to the IRS. Karate chop soientists in half. Curb stomp pregnant swarthoid soientists. Trap soientists in quicksand. Crush soientists in the trash compactor. Liquefy soientists in a vat of acid. Eat soientists. Dissect soientists. Exterminate soientists in the gas chamber. Stomp soientists skulls with steel toed boots. Cremate soientists in the oven. Lobotomize soientists . Mandatory abortions for soientists. Grind soientist fetuses in the garbage disposal. Drown soientists in fried chicken grease. Vaporize soientists with a ray gun. Kick old soientists down the stairs. Feed soientists to alligators. Slice soientists with a katana.

>>15723470
How come half of your final solutions to the science question rely on technology?

>>15725118
>Jhanas and hyperthermic people
Jesse, what the fuck are you talking about?

>>15723454
Ted wasn't right. Life has gotten better, is getting better, and will get better. I fucking love science.

>>15725118
>here are some exceptions that represent 0.00001% of pop therefore your analysis of society's overall trajectory is deboonked

https://4chon.me/new/src/1693993105682.mp4

>>15725174
why the fuck does he even care about the nature of suffering if he clearly doesn't believe in free will?

>>15723454
>technology bad
>wears clothes, uses tools
Lel

>>15725325
>if you don't want to live in the pod you have to live naked in Africa with no fire or shelter or clothing or else you're a hypocrite
Retard.

>>15725334
>hasn't actually read the shizos writings
Retard.

>>15725335
Can you point to exactly where he wrote about the evils of clothing and tools?

>>15725342
>Uhm acktshually he doesn't specifically state clothes and tools and therefore you lose, chud
Heh.

>>15725353
It's possible to be against some but not all technology. That's the point I'm making in case you're too stupid to grasp that. The idea that technology is good up until the point that it becomes harmful is in no way hypocritical.

>>15723454
Which is more dystopian really: that, or working for Stripchat and not being able to jerk off at work.

>>15725170
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperthymic_temperament

>>15725118
>>15725170
>>15725382
so in short
This niggerfaggot is unironically saying we can all adopt a mental disorder so as to make ourselves compatible with modern life.
And this brainless nigger of a so called human being says that means Ted was wrong?
Fucking hell what a retard.
Sorry I'm not altering myself to fit society. I'm going to crash society and normies get fucked.

>>15725360
Is it really dystopian though? It's just a break, and if you're working for a porn company half your employees must be backed up as hell. The only downside from a business perspective is if you're a man your productivity is most likely going to drop for an hour or so after jerking off

>>15725391
Yes. Basically, pic related with a great big "And that's a good thing!" stamped on the end.

>>15725391
Hyperthymia isn't a mental disorder

>>15723454
>Ted was right
About what? You think he didn't masturbate in his cabin?

>>15725118
>"All we have to do is wait for science fiction to become real and that will mean its wrong!"

>>15725458
>gene editing and embryo selection are science fiction

>>15725499
Correct.

>>15725118
>pretentious masturbatory ESLslop
Ignored

>>15725499
The hedonistic imperative is WAY more ambitious than gene editing and embryo selection, but that aside, have you ever stopped to wonder if what we today consider engineering hurdles are actually physical impossibilities? It's a more mature stance but I think you'll find it unfolds a little closer to base reality.

>>15725602
the end goal of the "hedonistic imperative" can be easily done this day in about a few hours but not in the way he suggests which is most probably just scifi fairy tales.

>>15725118
Imagine being such a low-IQ individual that you read the manifesto and keep thinking about the hedonic treadmill instad of what's actually written. Even though the hedomic treadmill has nohing to do with it. Even though the hedonic treadmill is implicitly refuted, at least as far as explaining the misery of modern society goes. Why did you post this brainlet?

>>15725602
The possibility of industrial society using technology to transform humans into golems that are more compatible with it is acknowledged early on in the manifesto. You replied to a retard who posted a tweet from a literal nobody with an internet career in pseudoscience who clearly hasn't even read what he's "criticizing". You are now helping this retard derail the thread. Well done.

Dont care, still using technology

>>15725322
Objective free will doesn't exist, but subjective free will does, simple as

>muh hedonic treadmill
>muh hyperthymic people
>muh gene editing pop-sci
>muh free will
Literal spam.

>>15725173
Masturbating to vr porn in a pod is great life ~4chud coom faggot.

>>15725325
>>15725334
>>15725335
>>15725342
>>15725353
>>15725356
>two retards who haven't actually read the manifesto
You can make basic tools and clothes without building a whole society around an industrial-technological system. As a rule of thumb, if the technology in question is something you can make on your own or with a couple of friends, it's not what Ted's criticism is concerned with.

>>15725915
Why would you call me a retard? I'm literally supporting exactly what you said.

>>15726066
>Why would you call me a retard?
Because you never really explain why some technology is bad while other technology is okay. You just make it look like arbitrary exceptions based on what you "feel" isn't all that bad, which only makes it look like he's right.

>>15726083
It's because I don't want to waste effort explaining things in-depth to retards when they're wrong at such a basic surface level.

>>15725322
>>15725871
Ways free will could potentially exist scientifically:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8EkwRgG4OE

>>15726084
>It's because I don't want to waste effort explaining
Then why did you reply? Just to make yourself look like the loser in the entire exchange? Also doesn't take any effort to explain. I explaied it in two sentences.

>>15725602
Why would the ideas proposed in The Hedonistic Imperative be physically impossible? We know that people like Jo Cameron who feel almost no pain or anxiety exist, so there's no reason why people couldn't be genetically engineered to at least Jo Cameron's level. And Ted's entire argument is basically him being stuck in a local maximum. Sure, it's plausible that people were happier on average than people in modern society, but destroying industrial society would prevent the world David Pearce wants to build from coming to fruition, which would objectively be far better than the primitive world Ted wanted to build.

>Why would the ideas proposed in The Hedonistic Imperative be physically impossible? We know that people like Jo Cameron who feel almost no pain or anxiety exist, so there's no reason why people couldn't be genetically engineered to at least Jo Cameron's level. And Ted's entire argument is basically him being stuck in a local maximum. Sure, it's plausible that people were happier on average than people in modern society, but destroying industrial society would prevent the world David Pearce wants to build from coming to fruition, which would objectively be far better than the primitive world Ted wanted to build.
When the soulless golem is too dumb to make its own thread.

>>15726094
>You are le dumb and have no soul
Not an argument

>>15726089
I explained what I set out to explain just fine.

>>15726097
You're a dumb and impulsive nigger. Go actually read the manifesto.

>>15726095
I'm specifically opposed to trying to reason with soulless golems like you. I'm not trying to "refute" anything you shit out, just pointing out it's funny how much of a reactive, initiative-lacking automaton you are that you have to parasitize on other people's threads to shill your sickly sci-fi fiction.

>>15723454
The thing I don’t really understand is that are you not supposed to figure out shit? We just stop advancing past some arbitrary point?

>>15726110
>We just stop advancing past some arbitrary point?
It wouldn't be an arbitrary point. It would be the point where further scientific discoveries are impractical without establishing an industrial system. Read the manifesto and you won't have to ask stupid questions.

>>15726105
I have. I explained what I set out to explain just fine.

>>15726122
You will always be just another nigger.

>>15726129
So will you. You're not special.

>>15726132
>You're not special.
No, but at least I'm not a petty, illiterate, dishonest little nigger.

>>15726136
Neither am I.

>>15726139
Those you want to be a part of see you for the pseud that you are. Those you pretend to oppose see that you're retarded. Sad. :^(

>>15726142
I'm glad you're able to confront these demons of yours here.

>>15726145
Thank you for sharing your incoherent thoughts. Please consult >>15726142 and then stop posting.

>>15726147
You shouldn't be so hard on yourself.

@15726153
>nigger ape starts to lose its mind with rage

>>15726155
Is that what you imagine is happening here?

>the illiterate nigger ape can't stop trying to (You) me
>it's just too desperate for my approval
LOL

>>15726110
Yes, also there is a fallacy in the thinking of endless advancing as a means to an end. Its a death cult built on ideas that are fantastical, not necessarily tethered to objective reality. Technophiles dream of something vague like "conquering the stars" when in fact it may prove to be entirely unfeasible and the industrial systems formed in the meantime towards that end could potentially cause great harm to humanity and other biological lifeforms on earth.

As far arbitrary, it would probably anything that involves economics of scale or large scale industry. Beyond that point, technology tends to form a system that binds humans to its service rather than the reverse. People are shaped and altered to fit the techno-industrial system, the system itself starts to see human nature as a problem to be modified and adapted into its own ends (self-propogation).
>>15725118
Is this that psychdelic using pseudo-intellectual from YouTube? I've watched some of his videos, he has a unique brand of mixting esoteric, philosophical arguments, and "scientific" investigation.

What he says here is in no sense a rebuttal to the manifeso. The whole point was that humans would be modified into a state where they find the system agreeable, or at least modified so that they won't disrupt it from self propagating. It makes me wonder if he actually even read it. Clearly he didn't understand the argument at all.

>>15725118
Also the hedonic treadmill angle is obtusely missing the core argument. The section on "surrogate activities" was the weakest aspect of the manifesto, and I notice it's the main focus of almost all criticisms towards it, but people tend to focus in on that one poorly definied segment and after attacking that, wave their hands as if they've defeated the entire argument of ISAIF, even though the larger point is still unrefuted