Comments by "dixon pinfold" (@dixonpinfold2582) on "Academy of Ideas" channel.

Ahh. Not a tr ol I around for miles. Peaceful.
1
From middle boyhood I sensed a perversion in the aspirations of the powerful, that it was ordinarily the sick who rose to the top while the healthy were content with other rewards. Only later did I see that it was envy which motivated the power-obsessed. Envy + a plan = Robespierre, Lady Macbeth, Stalin, and all the rest.
1
Very lower-middlebrow pseudo-intellectual self-congratulatory claptrap—your remarks and the writings of your heroes, that is. Your views amount to a call for, and an attempt to justify and glorify, a bloody revolution and brutal repression...in the name of a utopia. Perfection through destruction and death. No, thank you.
1
Don't be either. Just build your sanity and what other people do can neither tempt nor repulse you: your sanity will be your light. But I guess you're off to a start, kind of.👍
1
Nice attempt at division. Actually the video describes an attack on virtually everyone. On values, not classes—values concerning truth and freedom, which are in fact the concern of people in all classes. How infested this whole comments section is with assertions posing in support of the video which are in fact in support of division, meaning they are against the spirit of the video—a spirit of people maintaining a healthy solidarity.
1
Yes, your last sentence sounds definitely true.👏 But a pit bull makes such a good emblem of totalitarianism that it kind of takes the shine off such a maxim. 🤔 Also, I don't really see how freedom and fighting for freedom are supposed to be (uh, what's the term?) 'mutually ironical,' if you will. Who came up with that?
1
@SomeCanine A pit bull puppy, right? It's a small picture but it looks like it.
1
@sacul135 I agree with every word of that. I just think the creative drive, as impressive as it is, is no better nor any worse than any other of the drives. I would neither put it down nor exalt it in general terms, but instead do both. As it took all of our drives to get us here, we should respect all of them up to a point, and not place any too far above the others. Attempts to bury or annihilate any of the leading ones are mistaken in the sense that they will cost more than they return, over a lifetime or the span of a society or both. In the long run we cannot get away with savaging our natures. This makes moderation the great virtue in a way, by virtue of which we are here as much as any other, or perhaps more; underrated and unsung but actually the star of the show, because it's the only one that's at all very artificial and strained. Intelligence, courage, and kindness reside in people pretty naturally or not much at all. Civilization is little more than an effort to extract it (moderation) from everyone, which explains why it is the primary function of religion and why religion is a permanent part of civilization. So it's fine for anyone to say things like 'religion reveals eternal truth and meaning,' but they only refer to how useful it is for producing moderation in the name of civilization. Whatever system doesn't, we try to deny the status of religion, judging it cultic, heretical, Dionysian, dogmatic, fundamentalist, witchcraft, madness. In the same sense we have always been tempted to call the godless (i.e., atheists) wicked, and many still do. This is how I look at it instead of judging it on its own terms, which is the other option and the more vastly more popular one.
1
@wlm7434 Nice try, insinuating some low-key support for Hilt er into support for this video's message of freedom and sanity, in an attempt to corrode its moral legitimacy by association. Classic technique! 👏👏
1
Going into information quarantine is no answer. An uninformed people will most certainly be ruled harshly, and before long. The task, which is admittedly a difficult one, cannot be avoided: Seek out the best information possible, and encourage in yourself and others the values which made the information climate formerly so much healthier.
1
@joeld8825 Those are all the choices?
1
@joeld8825 I was making that very point with my reply and I regret to say that in my view your questions are unanswerable. (You perhaps feel the same way.) I can only assert the necessity of a sincere individual effort which never really ends. (And I hold that it does end with any religious enthusiasm resembling that which motivates some people to buy consumer packaged goods from a shelf. "All-in-One Moral Kit. Saves Time & Effort!" )
1
@beingsshepherd I notice your efforts to get good comments ratioed with incendiary replies. Classic technique. Your avatar goes right along with that, featuring a Remembrance poppy and a swastika—with an 'equals' sign between.
1
@beingsshepherd I care little whether destructive values or actions are sincere or insincere.
1
@beingsshepherd You've no basis for saying I don't understand war protestors. That's (unsurprisingly) arrogant and dull-minded of you. In 2003 I committed a great amount of time to vigorously protesting the Iraq War.
1
I think it just automatically resulted from a feminization of the world. Women are inherently more fearful, more risk-averse. Women now have far more say than formerly; in numerous contexts, not just child-rearing but a lot of others too, they have far more say than men. Thus the culture has become fear-steeped. Maleness has been ceaselessly denigrated for multiple generations now, to the point that now it has for some time even been labelled toxic, so how could it be otherwise? The unspoken maxim of the age, modelled with some justification on that of Animal Farm: Two ovaries good, two testes bad.
1
War is expensive and will create business and profits. That doesn't mean war should never be fought. It doesn't mean any given war is wrong. It doesn't mean we ought to be pacifists or require people in other lands be pacifists in the face of attack. Arms makers charging a mark-up on needed weaponry is well down the list of ill effects of war. The peril of undue influence Eisenhower warned against (at the time, wisely) comes at governments from many, many directions.
1
@andrina118 Whenever I see a post like yours—one that aims to confuse, to discourage, to attack hope, to make people cynical and rob them of salutary beliefs and confidence—my suspicions are acutely aroused. These are the classic techniques of so-called psy-ops, which are campaigns, sometimes highly successful, to demoralize people by manipulating their thoughts so they stop believing anybody, anything. Key words: confuse, manipulate, demoralize.
1
Who knows what the algo does to a great video like this? It might be dialling it back considerably, allowing it to appear in feeds only half as often, or an eighth as often, as it would without special attention. There are lots of possibilities besides just a total choking off of views. For example, a video, no matter its content, watched by quantities of people whose other viewing tends towards 'wrongthink', may be downgraded for that reason—never mind if it's about cats or curried peas.
1
We need one of those countdown clocks for totalitarianism like the one for nuclear war. Wait, no: we'll get one, and it'll be used to scare us falsely at some times and reassure us falsely at others.
1
Desposition doesn't seem to be in my Oxford. What do you mean by it?
1
"Resist much." I find that sounds reflexive and unthinking, undiscriminating. And it's very common, actually to the point of vulgarity, not to mention its corrosive effects on societies. "Resist if strenuous thought and learning, which you honestly hold to the fire, tells you that you must" is far better. But then all of that's surely implied by the much shorter "Think much."
1
I have a hypothesis that the explosion of youth anxiety has roots in kids watching porn from the age of ten or barely older.
1
Not to be flippant but, en français, 'C'est la vie.' Humanity, and life, are not perfectible. Just improvable, slightly. Be satisfied with the improvements you can make to yourself and hope not to be murdered young.
1
@MrJohnnyDistortion Wow. You'd never heard of ratioing and how it works, but just out of common sense you assumed that the raw ratio of likes to replies was crucial to where the algo places a comment in the section it's a part of? Must be nice having an IQ of 400.
1
@atlasadonis3752 I'm curious why you ask. It's extremely rare for anyone to ask that on social media.
1
@atlasadonis3752 Because it's personal information, I suppose. If one's computer were ever hacked, that would include passwords, which would enable the hacker to, among many other things, download one's entire YouTube comment history. All internet security professionals advise against posting any personal information online. You didn't know that? Anyway, what do you want from me? That's what I'm wondering. You're starting to irritate me.
1
@atlasadonis3752 Why did you delete your last post, which consisted of the question: "Do you contribute to necessity, or do you just suck out as much as possible from the system?" What are you doing?
1
@atlasadonis3752 It is not still up, so I recalled it from memory. So stop deflecting and answer the question: What are you doing? What is your tireless, persistent, rude, creepy and increasingly hostile interest in me and my life?
1
@yaasikasa17 Hahaha, that was my meaning too.
1
Was it a reply? I get the "returned error" message when I reply to a post but the post itself has already been deleted. I have, however, memorized a lengthy list of words which are not allowed. I don't get why they don't just publish the list.
1
@jacksondriscoll98 No, a stymieing of natural selection. The first victim of human intelligence was our sense of belonging in the universe. Deer and bees still have it, we irrecoverably lost it. That loss, which with considerable insight and justice Genesis calls the Knowledge of Good and Evil, stopped us cold in our evolutionary tracks. (Things have been enormously complicated and difficult since that moment, a fact which needs little pointing out.) I guess I'm a bit of a Nietzsche-ite, since I see it as a not-terribly-dignified crutch. But I'm not a thoroughgoing one, because I don't have a hard heart against it. People have their mortality and their questions about the purpose of their existence to deal with, the time allotted for it being both very short and all we have.
1
@obligatoryusername7239 Who said anything about a lack of belief in God entailing a lack of "a metaphysical framework to uphold morality"? Your reply smacks of beggaring the question. At the very least it amounts to a quite a bold proposition or two.
1
@obligatoryusername7239 There's absolutely zero need for belief in God for one to have morals. It's that simple. Moral instruction of the young needn't be a part of religious instruction. The fact that you can even ask those questions is just about all any needs to know in order to understand why slaughters take place in the name of god and religion. Your belief that there's a special holiness or holy "framework" to religious ethics ignores the flagrant reality that religious ethics (all of it, from 'love thy neighbour as thyself' to 'kill the idolaters wherever you find them') came from men, not God. You might as well as ask how state laws and state courts can possibly be just, being not informed by the divine teachings of religious law (Sharia law, for example). Likewise how state schools can possibly know what to teach their pupils, their curricula not being guided by God's hand. Likewise how a woman can possibly know how to dress in a morally appropriate way unless she had the benefit of a "framework" of instruction in a religious dress code. Your questions smack of fundamentalism, of a belief that the non-believer is barbarous, is somehow not fully human. Such a belief on anyone's part is a lack of imagination, and this lack of imagination is why subway cars and airplanes get blown up periodically. Godless people and people of faith alike can be highly ethical. Godless people and people of faith alike can commit atrocities.
1
@obligatoryusername7239 I never said the universe is meaningless, I never implied it, and I've never thought so. You keep saying there's no way to have morals unless one has faith in God, but that's just a fantasy of yours. It may be a help for some people, but by the same token others use religion as a way to justify immortality, so something tells me you doth protest too much.
1
More good psychoanalysts, I suppose. But not simply more. And of course there are other psychiatrists besides psychoanalysts. There are also non-MD therapists, psychologists for example.
1
Why not come out against utopianism and leave it at that? It's untrue that things never improve or worsen. Would you just as soon be a medieval peasant?
1
@starboard9551 Very well. I think you know what you have to do. Tidy up your hovel first.
1