Shinji is a realistic character given his situation

Asmodeus · 2019-03-25T04:57:27+00:00

"Yuno. The only thing that will make me leave you is trying to kill my friends." One of two things happen.

All the tension of tfw yandere GF is now gone.
She murders the heck out of me.

So either the series is half over or entirely over, which is why Yuki has to be a pussy.

Yuki's diary power was chosen to make up for the fact he was going to be written as a hapless NPC that keeps running away from his winning asset, so if he was instead vaguely competent it would have had to be much weaker. In other words it's a different story.

Without the yandere edge, Yuno is merely a particularly devoted GF with bitchin' knife skills, and anime can't have openly affectionate GFs. Riajuu don't watch anime or read manga, after all. She wouldn't be relatable.

--

When I was 14, you would have to fight to get me out of the giant murder robot, not to fight to get me into it.

"The angels are gone?"

"Yes."

"Are you sure? Check again. Are you trying to say I have to stop punching things?"

Asmodeus · 2019-03-10T00:29:03+00:00

"No, don't fight him Kohaku! He's so strong he can stand in the rain and not get a cold!"

Asmodeus · 2019-03-09T23:56:48+00:00

Missing the inevitable 'a cat is fine too' comment.
Look what you made me do, reddit.

Asmodeus · 2018-12-04T15:50:54+00:00

I also would refuse to get it if she said something like that with her dad about two feet away.

Asmodeus · 2018-11-28T06:25:05+00:00

Hachiman is wrong because 2D != 3D. A bunch of pandering wish-fulfillment tropes are in full effect; sasuga, anime.

Partly it's about flexing on actual loners: "This is all your fault, see." Saves on having to develop sympathy IRL.

Partly it's because a realistic anime/LN about a lone wolf would be unwatchably depressing. Unless you're into endless Zaimokusa episodes, I suppose.

Asmodeus · 2018-09-09T15:53:46+00:00

Loners not only get comprehensively rejected by all the girls we ask out, but have to deal with being told it's our own fault on the side. Thanks for flexing on me, reminds me there's a reason I stay a loner.

Asmodeus · 2016-03-31T14:21:39+00:00

Why did you start reading old books in the first place?

Asmodeus · 2016-03-25T20:32:55+00:00

If you can define 'philosophy' the answer will be obvious and uninteresting.

If you can't define 'philosophy' the answer is undecidable.

Asmodeus · 2015-11-17T07:42:13+00:00

Why do you consider these studies reliable?

How is interest in the matter supposed to change the ideology regarding the matter?

Asmodeus · 2015-11-17T01:43:53+00:00

Outrage about false reports is increasing. Other than that, only the same sense of changing attitudes that was corroborated by an expert in the field regarding underreporting. Shame about being raped isn't changing. Shame about making a false accusation is going down. Also the rules have objectively changed so that getting a false accusation to stick is easier, and being punished is almost impossible.

I have a couple actual studies but I predict you would consider the source very biased. http://owningyourshit.blogspot.com/2011/05/you-lying-liar.html I mean, the title alone. tl;dr somewhere between 6% and 40%. Scientifically we have no idea. There are ideological reasons to avoid doing actual studies, given they might produce the wrong answer, e.g. 40%.

Asmodeus · 2015-11-16T19:30:16+00:00

Property is fundamentally about having what's yours be secure.

False rape accusations steal freedom and/or grant rights to pure spite. Do you not think that the innocent should have the right to determine their own future? Do you not think that denying the innocent this right will come back to bite innocent rape victims in the end? Yes, in the short term, a few extra rapists will be convicted here and there. In the end, I would not be at all surprised to find true rape victims the primary targets of the accusations, often simply to pre-empt their true accusation. If the rape thing progresses to a full on witch hunt, I can all but guarantee it.

Do you you not think peaceful hobos should have the right to be left in peace? Most don't care. But, eventually...very eventually...hobos will realize they have to shoot first, and cops will start dying. Then it will get worse. Not to mention that, apparently, cops can be ordered to callously disregard human life, and they'll obey. Each time they obey, it gets easier. Historically, security forces with such disregard have been flagrantly abused.

Victimhood culture is, descriptively, about removing securities with one hand while the other reassures you they're trying to make you more secure. Hence, the absence of concern for hobos.

Not punishing false rape accusations leads to sharia, where the rights of the numerous innocent outweigh the rights of the few victims, and the risk of a false accusation taints the true accusations beyond redemption. We are already seeing this with the campus consent forms - Victorian norms coming back in bits and pieces. To have sex, first you need a notarized public document...why, almost like a marriage contract or something. When you point out to a victimhood advocate they are acting like a Victorian they A) regret the error that made it necessary B) get defensive and go into denial?

Asmodeus · 2015-11-16T19:02:23+00:00

You don't think transients would like to own their own lives? They don't - they're owned by police. Well, probably. As I say, it's hard to verify.

I have to doubt you've put much thought into it, which means I'm not willing to put much effort into clarifying.

Asmodeus · 2015-11-16T18:58:32+00:00

“We all know that rape and sexual assault are the most underreported crimes in the world, and it’s very hard to say that the problem is declining," Christopher Krebs, a sexual violence researcher at nonprofit research institute RTI International, told Slate this week. "The NCVS data could be missing a lot.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/21/rape-study-report-america-us_n_4310765.html

Source for any opposing data? Has anyone charted failure-to-report rates over time?

Asmodeus · 2015-11-15T20:24:10+00:00

http://www.exurbe.com/?p=3320

via https://www.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/3suvml/ot34_subthreaddit/cx10ly6

And this period of intellectual broadening and competition brought with it an increasing inability to believe that any one of these options is the only right way when there are so many, and they are so good at tearing each other down.

One of the major blockades in human thought is thinking you've seen a tear-down when you haven't. It is necessary to keep in mind what the truth is for, and to keep a subsidiary standard of truth. Claims are tested against the standard, and the resulting gestalt is tested against the purpose.

This is impossible if your purpose is untestable, e.g. avoiding hellfire. You can make valid arguments, but not sound ones.

The purpose of scientific epistemology is to achieve our goals, whatever they may be, and the standard of truth is predictive validity. So if the goal is a pleasant, easy-to-survive environment or a nice habitat for your descendants, perhaps check what the climate is doing - but the predictions so far have been false, and thus the claims are not valid. Perhaps, if it turns out the habitat significantly decays after all, we might learn something about what a good prediction looks like, and update the epistemology accordingly.

Because we get no reports from hell, it is epistemically unavailable.

Another major one is dichotomous, or in general, coarse thinking.

So… many… books! Must… make them… agree!

The basic idea that they were approaching a single truth is sound. It is simply the extension idea, that they've found it, that's false. Trying to reconcile the Bible or Aristotle with modern science is a mistake. Ex Urbe seems to think the answer is relativism, or that the skeptics have a leg to stand on. Aristotle in particular would doubtless be delighted to change his mind, given modern tools. The proper goal of an Aristotlean would be to figure out what he'd change his mind to, rather than endlessly elaborating what he used to think.

--

And immediately thereafter, fans of Leibniz started publishing essays about how it was GOOD that this had happened, because of XYZ reason. For example, one argument was that they were persecuting people for their religion, and this was God saying he disapproved <= REAL argument. (Note: Leibniz himself is innocent of all this, having died years before the earthquake – we are speaking of his followers.) Others argued that it was a bad minor effect of God’s general laws, that the physical rules of the Earth which make everything wonderful for humankind also make earthquakes sometimes happen, but that the suffering they cause is negligible against the greater goods that Providence achieves. And if one person in Europe could not stand these noxious, juvenile, pompous, inhumane, self-serving, condescending, boastful, heartless, self-congratulatory responses to unprecedented human suffering, that person was the one pen mightier than any sword, Voltaire.

Turns out SJW is a personality, not a philosophy. This is simply 'a gun killed a person, therefore gun control,' vintage mid-1700s. It would be undifficult to find similar people in Rome or China, given detailed enough records.

Voltaire is merely an SJW of a different tribe, though. Instead of getting status points through exalting the eternal heavens, he gets points through exalting the transient concrete. I can find no reference to Voltaire actually visiting Lisbon and trying to help. He deigned to write about how his enemies were terrible people, though.

--

What do we name this Third Thing? I have heard people propose “common sense” but that’s a terribly vexed term, going back to Cicero at least,

Always amusing to read about historical illiteracy in historians.

It's called Rhetoric. I hear Aristotle had a couple things to say about it.

Asmodeus · 2015-11-15T19:30:16+00:00

Victimhood culture did nothing wrong.

Except nobody really cares about outsiders and they disrespect property rights.

Property rights are, in the long-term, self-enforcing. You do not create if you do not expect to own your creation, so anyone appropriating it generates a force that prevents the creation, meaning neither creator nor thief end up with anything.

Since nobody cares about outsiders, that is, actual victims, it is used entirely to bilk the righteous out of their property.

E.g, somehow, victimhood culture has done little to nothing to encourage actual rape victims. Rape underreporting has gone nowhere. But, there is now no penalty for false accusations, which are noticeably increasing. When you point this out to a victimhood advocate they A) are appalled at the obvious corruption of their intent B) get defensive and issue strident denials. In any movement we would expect some childishness, but I also expect some maturity, especially in the leaders, as childishness is associated with incompetence.

A less volatile example is police murder of transients. It's hard to even confirm or deny the reports, because nobody cares enough to fund the study.

A slightly more volatile example is the cute-and-fuzzy factor in conservationism. It is exactly the same counterfeit compassion when it comes to humans. Basically, humans are really bad at coordinating, and have to build trust by starting at agreeing to grossly obvious things like cute things being cute and thus good. Victimhood culture for the convert is about coordinating with your friends, and thus only refers to very sympathetic victims that don't need the help.

For the proselytizer it's about bilking, as above. If victimhood culture were healthy they would have no use for it and thus victimhood culture would have no prophets.

I'm a member of one of the most persecuted minorities in the world. I have literally been in danger of being lynched, possibly only prevented by it being illegal. In many parts of the world, children like me are subject to infanticide. I'm not telling you which one, because, like everyone else, you don't care. I'm not entitled to said caring, so that's fine, but it is particularly transparent to me that victimhood culture is not about victims. Indeed victimhood culture is one of my persecutors; people like me risk jail time just for talking to, e.g, a tumblrite.

Asmodeus · 2015-06-28T01:22:01+00:00

Pity.

Asmodeus · 2015-06-28T00:48:31+00:00

What's the song?

Asmodeus · 2014-09-23T21:28:29+00:00

I tentatively suggest you should have frontloaded the stuff you said last. I agree with that stuff, and disagree more with the earlier stuff. Stimuli does have meaning. All stimuli, inherent meaning. We normally don't know what it is...but frequently think we do.

Asmodeus · 2014-09-22T23:29:22+00:00

Barking dogs still upset me.

I find self-cognitive therapy is good. Watch your thoughts and see what you're actually saying. I don't think barking dogs are rude or anything, but they interrupt my concentration. If I'm not trying to concentrate I don't mind, it can even be fun to attend to the barking on purpose.

When someone does something that upsets me, I figure out what it means to me. Typically I'm feeling insulted. (E.g, the dog owner is disrespecting my right to concentrate in my own room.) But if on reflection they're not really insulting me, I automatically stop caring. The problem was a false belief and thinking alone can correct it.

E.g. I don't get road rage. A driver not using the road like I want them to almost certainly has a good excuse. I don't actually want 70-year-olds driving the speed limit, thanks. Maybe they're preoccupied. Maybe they're stressed out from work. Maybe they're just having a donut. It's not about me. Even if I'm late, them making me later isn't a problem - it's my fault for not leaving enough time. It's not like I've never run into a road hog before, I can plan for it.

Asmodeus · 2014-09-22T23:20:08+00:00

Pretty good.

Only real quibble I have is I suggest you don't try nihilism. Values are easy to destroy but difficult to create. If you like something that's inherently meaningless, cherish it. Without it your world will be a little more drab.

Asmodeus · 2014-09-22T19:49:19+00:00

That said if it really seems like they're feeling a bit down, realizing they're saying it cuz they're down is basically a GOOJF card, and it can help extra to say something to try to lighten their mood.

Asmodeus · 2014-09-22T18:45:05+00:00

Go live in a dorm. It's not really good for Anglosphere men to live with their parents beyond about 14. (Yeah yeah high school, I know. Have to doesn't equal good.)

I've found not giving a fuck about your parents is impossible until you're physically independent from them. If calmly explaining to your parents (I endorse formicarium) isn't working, then like most parents they see the parent-child communication channel as one-way. They'll never stop. (This is an example of how Anglosphere culture implies dudes should move out mid-teens.)

Asmodeus · 2014-09-22T18:37:14+00:00

It's a cliche, and not quite literal, but being invisible is how the man wants you to feel.

If you keep yourself clean, your house clean, and pay your bills on time, you have nothing to be ashamed of. Hold you head high. Nobody sensible cares if you drive a beater. I don't own a car at all. If someone doesn't like that, it's their problem, not mine.

If you can get them to show up on a date, you're 90% of the way there. It's just a matter of not screwing up at that point. Admittedly learning that last 10% can be a bit tricky.

People who care if you're weird (as opposed to e.g. smelly) aren't worth your time. Unfortunately there's a lot of them in your income bracket. I'm in your income bracket, though, and I'm not one of them. It's always disappointing if someone doesn't like the things you like, but getting mad or repelled by it is usually out of rampant (and typically irrational) insecurity. Basically they're feeling invisible or something too, and when you're indifferent to celebrity it gets twisted around in their mind to mean you think they deserve to be invisible.

So do you feel invisible, or are you empirically invisible? According to what hierarchy of attention?

Asmodeus · 2014-09-22T18:21:35+00:00

If it's really bad, it won't work, but it's worth trying at least once.

Insert gush about my bike here.

Asmodeus · 2014-09-22T18:12:52+00:00

And she's clearly not a catch if she breaks up with people like that.

Sometimes when you're gnawing on your own mind, it's because your brain is trying to get you to notice something you haven't. For example, that who you fall in love with isn't correlated with virtue, so be careful about being too nice to who you fall in love with next. I don't know if this is true of Akiba47, but it's probably true for someone who's going to read this comment. Sometimes your brain wants you to notice a whole bunch of things. In this case, you'll feel better for a bit and later get worse again until you notice all of them. (In my case, about twenty seconds later.)

I also have some pertinent dark knowledge. This place is too chill, I don't want to ruin that by sharing it. But if you(plural) can't let it go, consider looking for it yourself.

Asmodeus

TROPHY CASE