CRUISE & DOOM WERE RIGHT about everything

[jusplay4fun]

You need to change the name of this thread.

And why should I care what Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber, wrote or said? Is he the new Nostradamus?

[Dukasaur]

So, let me get this right:

saxi thinks we should follow the psychiatric and psychological advice from the Unabomber (and mathematician)

Have you read Kaczynski's Industrial Society and Its Future? It's probably the most lucid, cogent, prophetic piece of writing I've ever read. And Kacyznski was not just a guy who knew math. Many of the greatest mathematicians of the 20th century who met him said he was the most brilliant person they'd ever met and could have won the Nobel Prize if he hadn't switched careers to serial bomber.

Most people didn't bother reading it because the lying media rolled out all their tricks to delegitimize it:

- Refer to an essay as a "manifesto" (this is the "government" vs. "regime" parlor trick)
- Refer to anything longer than five pages as "rambling"
- Exaggerate copyediting issues (the WaPo said it was "riddled with spelling and grammar errors" ... in fact, there were 10 --- and Kaczynski wrote the entire thing in ink pen on yellow legal pads with no editor and no spellcheck, which the WaPo didn't mention)

The result:

The Kaczynski manifesto, a rambling diatribe riddled with spelling and grammar errors ...

+1

While I disagree with a lot of what Ted says, there's no doubt that an excellent essay has largely been smeared because of the unpopularity of its author.

[DoomYoshi]

I demand this thread be changed to DoomYoshi was right also:

How can you honestly make a pharmacological distinction when they are basically all the same? Mental disorders are not something that happens in the brain. They are something that happens in the culture. People are just describing what they don't like about a person. Something is going on in the brain but scientists still don't know what. Psychiatry is an anti-biology science.

Think of some implications of this: depression or anxiety are not diseases, just symptoms of something else. Addiction is not a disease, just a symptom.

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=225711&p=4995719

[jimboston]

Don't forget I was a Scientologist for almost a year-and-a-half. I'm well aware of what they're saying. However, it isn't necessary.

The completely secular and non-mystical Humanist Institute used to treat depression with heavy aerobic exercise, three times a day, and claimed a success rate higher than mainstream psychiatry. The Humanist Institute taught that depression is a just a natural semi-hibernatory state which in nature would allow us to lay in a cave and wait out whatever crisis we were hiding from, but like most of our natural instincts it has become maladaptory in our modern pampered society. We need to kick-start our bodies in order to cue the brain into realizing that it's time to get out of the cave and get back on the hunting trail.

The gestalt and ACT people say much the same thing, but for completely different reasons.

My Grade 10 World Religions teacher, who was Zen, used to say similar things, for Buddhist reasons.

I don't endorse the Humanist Institute any more than I endorse Scientology, nor do I endorse ACT or Zen. My point is that these conclusions can be arrived at through many different schools of thought. Just as your first response to burning yourself should not be to slather your skin with Flamazene but rather to get away from the fire, your first response to being depressed should not be to pump your body with Celexa but rather to fix what's dragging you down.

... mind you, the year that I was on Celexa was great!!!

I couldn’t forget you were a Scientologist because I never knew it in the first place.

I agree you don’t need Scientology to achieve the results described, you can get there via other methods.

My point was, Cruise may be right in what he’s saying about drugs… and what he’s saying is directly impacted by his “religion”… BUT to have a thread titled “Tom Cruise was Right” implies (in my mind) a suggestion that he’s right about everything. Which he ain’t.

[saxitoxin]

I demand this thread be changed to DoomYoshi was right also:

How can you honestly make a pharmacological distinction when they are basically all the same? Mental disorders are not something that happens in the brain. They are something that happens in the culture. People are just describing what they don't like about a person. Something is going on in the brain but scientists still don't know what. Psychiatry is an anti-biology science.

Think of some implications of this: depression or anxiety are not diseases, just symptoms of something else. Addiction is not a disease, just a symptom.

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=225711&p=4995719

FINE, changed

[saxitoxin]

to have a thread titled “Tom Cruise was Right” implies (in my mind) a suggestion that he’s right about everything

[jimboston]

to have a thread titled “Tom Cruise was Right” implies (in my mind) a suggestion that he’s right about everything

Whatever.

[Dukasaur]

to have a thread titled “Tom Cruise was Right” implies (in my mind) a suggestion that he’s right about everything

Whatever.

Dear God, for the second time in under 24 hours I have to agree with Saxi. What is happening to me?




Saying "Niki Lauda won the race" does not imply that he won ALL races, or even that he was the Greatest of All Time (although obviously he was.) It just implies that he won the race being referred to.


Also, it's nice to see Doom getting some recognition.

[jusplay4fun]

So, let me get this right:

saxi thinks we should follow the psychiatric and psychological advice from the Unabomber (and mathematician)

Have you read Kaczynski's Industrial Society and Its Future? It's probably the most lucid, cogent, prophetic piece of writing I've ever read. And Kacyznski was not just a guy who knew math. Many of the greatest mathematicians of the 20th century who met him said he was the most brilliant person they'd ever met and could have won the Nobel Prize if he hadn't switched careers to serial bomber.

Most people didn't bother reading it because the lying media rolled out all their tricks to delegitimize it:

- Refer to an essay as a "manifesto" (this is the "government" vs. "regime" parlor trick)
- Refer to anything longer than five pages as "rambling"
- Exaggerate copyediting issues (the WaPo said it was "riddled with spelling and grammar errors" ... in fact, there were 10 --- and Kaczynski wrote the entire thing in ink pen on yellow legal pads with no editor and no spellcheck, which the WaPo didn't mention)

The result:

The Kaczynski manifesto, a rambling diatribe riddled with spelling and grammar errors ...

+1

While I disagree with a lot of what Ted says, there's no doubt that an excellent essay has largely been smeared because of the unpopularity of its author.

Yes, Kaczynski made some interesting points and even made a few valid points. I doubt Ted Kaczynski made a significant difference in slowing Technology, despite what ConfedSS advocates.

[saxitoxin]

to have a thread titled “Tom Cruise was Right” implies (in my mind) a suggestion that he’s right about everything

Whatever.

Dear God, for the second time in under 24 hours I have to agree with Saxi. What is happening to me?

You just have a stronger will than others and can resist my charms better than people like, for instance, ralf who dropped to his knees in the first 10 seconds.

[jimboston]

Dear God, for the second time in under 24 hours I have to agree with Saxi. What is happening to me?

Saying "Niki Lauda won the race" does not imply that he won ALL races, or even that he was the Greatest of All Time (although obviously he was.) It just implies that he won the race being referred to.


Also, it's nice to see Doom getting some recognition.

So it’s one time were I make an invalid assumption based on a dumb ass Saxi post.

Crucify me already.

[Dukasaur]

Dear God, for the second time in under 24 hours I have to agree with Saxi. What is happening to me?

Saying "Niki Lauda won the race" does not imply that he won ALL races, or even that he was the Greatest of All Time (although obviously he was.) It just implies that he won the race being referred to.


Also, it's nice to see Doom getting some recognition.

So it’s one time were I make an invalid assumption based on a dumb ass Saxi post.

Crucify me already.

Aw, Stewie, don't be like that. I still love you.

[Sara678]

I am sure there is no magic pill for depression. I think that each of us has faced obvious or hidden psychological problems, but not everyone is ready to talk about it openly. Each person is unique and requires the most adapted approach and special attention, especially when it comes to self-esteem issues. For myself, I found a resource [Mod edit (dk): spam link removed] where, with the help of qualified specialists, I discovered a lot of new things in psychology and increasing my self-esteem. It helped me to deal with many problems.

[checwilliam871]

Good afternoon I support you Sarah. Of course, the world is not getting better and negative impacts cannot be avoided. Perhaps antidepressants solve the problem, but as for me, this is all temporary. I would start with myself. I am sure that licensed therapists with all the qualifications and knowledge will be able to make the healing process as effective and individual as possible. Therapy helps a person discover his main priorities in life and fight for his interests, no matter what. I support online therapy.

[mookiemcgee]

In section 213, Dr. Kaczynski correctly predicts the American Left will go from opposing Big Tech (which they were doing in the '90s when he wrote) to becoming one of its most slavish cheerleaders (as today).

Because of their need for rebellion and for membership in a movement, leftists or persons of similar psychological type often are attracted to a rebellious or activist movement whose goals and membership are not initially leftist. The resulting influx of leftish types can easily turn a non-leftist movement into a leftist one, so that leftist goals replace or distort the original goals of the movement.

To avoid this, a movement that exalts nature and opposes technology must take a resolutely anti-leftist stance and must avoid all collaboration with leftists. Leftism is in the long run inconsistent with wild nature, with human freedom and with the elimination of modern technology. Leftism is collectivist; it seeks to bind together the entire world (both nature and the human race) into a unified whole. But this implies management of nature and of human life by organized society, and it requires advanced technology. You can’t have a united world without rapid long-distance transportation and communication, you can’t make all people love one another without sophisticated psychological techniques, you can’t have a “planned society” without the necessary technological base. Above all, leftism is driven by the need for power, and the leftist seeks power on a collective basis, through identification with a mass movement or an organization. Leftism is unlikely ever to give up technology, because technology is too valuable a source of collective power.

The anarchist too seeks power, but he seeks it on an individual or small-group basis; he wants individuals and small groups to be able to control the circumstances of their own lives. He opposes technology because it makes small groups dependent on large organizations.

Some leftists may seem to oppose technology, but they will oppose it only so long as they are outsiders and the technological system is controlled by non-leftists. If leftism ever becomes dominant in society, so that the technological system becomes a tool in the hands of leftists, they will enthusiastically use it and promote its growth. In doing this they will be repeating a pattern that leftism has shown again and again in the past.

The entire book is page after page of prophecy that has come true.

THANK GOD SAXI DOESN'T HAVE MY MAILING ADDRESS

[saxitoxin]

In section 213, Dr. Kaczynski correctly predicts the American Left will go from opposing Big Tech (which they were doing in the '90s when he wrote) to becoming one of its most slavish cheerleaders (as today).

Because of their need for rebellion and for membership in a movement, leftists or persons of similar psychological type often are attracted to a rebellious or activist movement whose goals and membership are not initially leftist. The resulting influx of leftish types can easily turn a non-leftist movement into a leftist one, so that leftist goals replace or distort the original goals of the movement.

To avoid this, a movement that exalts nature and opposes technology must take a resolutely anti-leftist stance and must avoid all collaboration with leftists. Leftism is in the long run inconsistent with wild nature, with human freedom and with the elimination of modern technology. Leftism is collectivist; it seeks to bind together the entire world (both nature and the human race) into a unified whole. But this implies management of nature and of human life by organized society, and it requires advanced technology. You can’t have a united world without rapid long-distance transportation and communication, you can’t make all people love one another without sophisticated psychological techniques, you can’t have a “planned society” without the necessary technological base. Above all, leftism is driven by the need for power, and the leftist seeks power on a collective basis, through identification with a mass movement or an organization. Leftism is unlikely ever to give up technology, because technology is too valuable a source of collective power.

The anarchist too seeks power, but he seeks it on an individual or small-group basis; he wants individuals and small groups to be able to control the circumstances of their own lives. He opposes technology because it makes small groups dependent on large organizations.

Some leftists may seem to oppose technology, but they will oppose it only so long as they are outsiders and the technological system is controlled by non-leftists. If leftism ever becomes dominant in society, so that the technological system becomes a tool in the hands of leftists, they will enthusiastically use it and promote its growth. In doing this they will be repeating a pattern that leftism has shown again and again in the past.

The entire book is page after page of prophecy that has come true.

THANK GOD SAXI DOESN'T HAVE MY MAILING ADDRESS

WANNA BET?

[bigtoughralf]

Replace 'leftists' with 'people' and 'technology'* with 'anything' and you now have a prescient statement that applies to all opposition to anything ever.

You now owe me premium in return for the priceless fortune telling services I have just provided.

*whatever that's meant to mean there

[bigtoughralf]

History time: the unofficial national anthem of England (Jerusalem) takes its lyrics directly from a 19th socialist poem that was written as a criticism of the development of UK industry, saying it was ruining the once green and pleasant country:



FAST FORWARD 100 or so years and loonie Communists like Jeremy Corbyn and Meghan Merkel were lamenting the closure of the UK's coal mines, because Commies love coal.

tl;dr saxi's author correctly predicted the shift in attitudes that took place in the mid-1900s

[Dukasaur]

History time: the unofficial national anthem of England (Jerusalem) takes its lyrics directly from a 19th socialist poem that was written as a criticism of the development of UK industry, saying it was ruining the once green and pleasant country:



FAST FORWARD 100 or so years and loonie Communists like Jeremy Corbyn and Meghan Merkel were lamenting the closure of the UK's coal mines, because Commies love coal.

tl;dr saxi's author correctly predicted the shift in attitudes that took place in the mid-1900s

[Dukasaur]

On a serious note our relationship with technology has always been conflicted. It fills our bellies but empties our soul, and at any given moment one or the other is suffering.

[DoomYoshi]

So, just to follow up this topic. Chemistry World is running a special on Chemistry of the Brain. One of the best articles is this one:
https://www.chemistryworld.com/features ... 73.article

As such it might seem strange that researchers like Hashemi still don’t fully understand how SSRIs work, and why they work better for some patients than others. In fact, researchers have struggled to balance the drugs’ benefits with their shortcomings for decades. In 2004, Chemistry World reported findings that they only work slightly better than taking an inactive placebo. At the same time, concerns around increased risk of suicide among patients, especially children, taking SSRIs came to prominence. SSRIs also have other potentially serious side effects...

SSRIs remain controversial, however, as biochemical and social views on depression collide. Biochemical researchers want to know what is happening in our brains during depression, and whether we can use those processes to help sufferers. Social researchers, meanwhile, point out that drugs only treat the symptoms of depression, which can mask or distract from the more fundamental issue of addressing its societal causes . The uncertainty over how SSRIs work is a key area for conflict. But why does that uncertainty persist?...

People link serotonin and depression more closely than they should, Moncrieff emphasises, and has a suggestion for why. ‘There’s a strong desire among the medical profession to see depression as a biological condition, and to believe that we have a treatment that will help,’ she says. ‘People have come to expect and to want a chemical treatment for their low mood.’

Moncrieff argues that drug companies, doctors and psychiatrists benefit from this situation because it’s profitable. She also suggests that it’s convenient for policy makers to support their use to avoid tackling ‘endemic social discontent’ in other ways. So, perhaps what Moncrieff calls the antidepressants’ ‘perceived usefulness’ has prevented us from more thoroughly questioning how they work.

‘If you’re a politician, you can just move it over to the experts, rather than having to think “Why are so many people in our society unhappy?”’ she says. ‘Could it be to do with financial insecurity and poverty and inequality? We are medicalising the consequences of social and economic policies that render some people inactive, unemployed and insecure in housing and finances.’...

Castrén hopes that SSRI effects on plasticity might reconcile ideas about social and biochemical factors. A person’s social environment, potentially including psychotherapy, must help support better mental health while drugs trigger plasticity. ‘You need both,’ Castrén comments. However, he notes that SSRIs ‘are cheaper than candy’, whereas support in the form of psychotherapy is very expensive. ‘With the number of people suffering from depression, it’s hardly possible to even think about having a psychotherapist for all of these people.’

Cheaper to medicate people than to fix problems. Why not just mass euthanasia then?

You know what else works "slightly better than taking an inactive placebo" - regular church attendance. It's actually far better, similar to quitting smoking or getting regular exercise in impact on physical and mental health.

Jesus, for the win!

[2dimes]

Blade runner?

[Votanic]

Blade runner?

Tom Cruise does all his own stunts and only eats 1200 calories a day. Incredible discipline and focus is required.
With the help of Scientology, Tom Cruise completely sublimated his latent homosexuality and used that 'Will to Power' energy to become The Last Movie Star.
Even now, after extensive dental reconstruction, Cruise still has a single upper tooth in the exact center of his mouth, a place where normal people have two teeth.
Tom Cruise is not normal, ...the Great never are.