https://youtu.be/31e0RcImReY?si=18IbWnHxRGAfticv

From the title it might not sound super related, but she goes super in depth on how these intelligence researches usually are extremely problematic. As in literally telling women that women did better in these tests made them perform as well or better than men in typically “male intelligence areas”. We don’t really understand intelligence, and how it develops, and how to measure it.

So ascribing higher or lower intelligence in certain fields to certain groups just doesn’t work. Irregardless for how statistically sound it might be. We just don’t understand the parameters around it well enough to control for it.

After seeing the most recent münecat video I don’t believe research like this anymore.

Yeah we made a huge mistake being born wrong 😕

Lmao South China Morning Post and Radio Free Asia are literally propaganda mouthpieces for the CIA

But using a VPN is not illegal in China… why would you even have to explain why you’re using one?

If prices don’t decrease and wages don’t increase (as a median, not average), inflation “ending” makes no difference.

Who gives a fuck it inflation “is over” if I’m still paying more for the same shit and making the same amount of money?

That is a simplification to make a point, but I think it’s important to know that this never happened.

Barter economies didn’t exist as a historical process. They only existed in very specific situations. Such as when a market based economy collapses (for example after the Roman Empire collapsed, in some more distant places, until a new power could establish a market) and when two groups that had different economic models encountered each other.

What existed before monetary market systems were debt systems, maybe with organised ledgers. And before that what existed were gift (like the Hawaiians) and palatial economies (like the Incas and Mycenaeans).

This is already very well established within anthropology and archeology. David Graeber’s “Debt the first 5,000 years” was a bestseller man…

TL,DR: Hunter gatherers didn’t barter. They did things for each other and then “owed” each other. This bond, of being indebted to your fellow men and them being indebted to you, is what was the basis of most societies.

I wouldn’t be so sure that “the planet” will be fine. All the species of animals and plants that we know and love will likely go extinct. Even if we do survive like the little cockroaches we are (in the best way possible) we’re never gonna see this world again. It will be dead forever. We will be alone, in a world filled with life that we never learned to love and know. Truly aliens on an alien planet.

And people still talk about the “China real estate collapse” lmao

Got it, so you have nothing. But that is obvious, or you wouldn’t think absurd things like this war was a war of conquest or anything like that.

The last chicken and first proto-chicken wouldn’t be 1 generation apart. The changes are so small that it takes thousands of generations for anything even close to beginning speciation to occur. If we literally did what you said, we would go backwards forever and when we got to something that looked completely unlike a chicken we’d be “shit, we have to go the other way around and check again, all the animals around this one look exactly like it, for thousands of generations”.

Wtf does that have to do with anything? You think Putin and the current Russian government, who are staunch anti-communist and have repeatedly disavowed the USSR are…? Like what is the MATERIAL analysis here? You are just talking about your vibes and ideology!

I find it crazy how basically every Marxist since, well Marx, has pretty much clairvoyance powers. It’s of course not that, it’s just that material analysis really is the best way to understand reality. But when all you have are vibes, ideology and moralism, Marxists do seem like witches.

But basically, just read and watch some Marxists my friend. Even light-Marxists like Yanis Varoufakis are good at “predicting” the future.

We have all been expecting this since the 1800s lmao.

Why would Russia do that? What material, factual reasons do you have for them to do it?

But that line can only ever be imaginary. There was never a proto-chicken that birthed a chicken. All chickens were birthed by chickens, all proto-chickens birthed proto-chickens.

We can make an imaginary line, but if went looking for it we would never find it.

Psychopaths can just as well have morality systems… they will just look very different from yours.

Morality is ideological definition of right or wrong. To you, scamming someone might be wrong. To a psychopath, getting money from a sucker who’s less smart/strong/awesome than you is right.

Might makes right is a moral system… it might be “imoral” to you, but it’s a moral system nonetheless.

What you suppose is your “internal” morality compass is an “internalised” one.

I wouldn’t kill my grandma because I love her, not because it’s “wrong”. I won’t kill anyone, I guess, because I don’t like seeing living beings suffer. Not because it’s “wrong”.

Morality is always an internalised “system”. It can’t be “natural”, it’s always ideological.

But that doesn’t mean that being materialistic in analysis of our existence as humans would make you do “evil” things. If you try to analyse us as a species scientifically, we realise that we literally evolved to cooperate and be nice to each other. Our chemistry makes that necessary. We hate being alone and seeing those around us suffer, because those things produce “feel bad” chemicals. We love helping each other because that produces “feel good” chemicals. On average of course (as you mention psychopaths do exist).

In fact, a purely material analysis of us would show that greed, individualism, destroying the planet, killing all animals on it, making large portions of our species to suffer in poverty etc. are counterproductive. Those things all make us individually feel worse and have worse lives. We would have the best lives if everyone around us had access to all amazing developments of the past centuries freely, if the animals and ecosystems of the world were protected, if the people around us cared about us and lived with us, not despite us. And none of that is moral, or based on morality. Just science and materialism.

Ok? Not sure what you mean by this hahaha

morality noun principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behaviour. “the matter boiled down to simple morality: innocent prisoners ought to be freed”

There isn’t much of a distinction between ethics and morality. Ethics is mostly spoken of as a philosophical question, and morality as an ideological one. Ethics is usually associated with the ancient Greeks, and morality to Christianity.

What I mean is that if we allow external entities and “authorities” to dictate to us what is right or wrong (an ideology, the Pope, a philosopher we like etc.), we aren’t living materially and objectively, but ideologically. We are being controlled by externalities.

Bro…… you can’t have a functioning democracy with an anti-democratic party freely participating in it. If a party’s explicit goal is to end democracy, they really SHOULDN’T be allowed to participate in democracy at all.

Paradox of tolerance and all…

Democracy shouldn’t be a free-for-all, where warlords can win enough votes to conquer the world. That is insane.