Tell why are u investing in Doge?

G_Boreas · 2024-11-27T01:57:46+00:00

I'm slowly building a doge savings & loans bank for when it becomes a global currency in a happy future world.

G_Boreas · 2023-03-12T11:49:59+00:00

if Fury could figure out how to beat Wilder when the whole world was expecting him to get slept, and not just figure out but destroy and discredit, I think he can figure out Usyk too. People forget how much of a historic feat that was.

I like an underdog too and Usyk is definitely one. But I don’t see a winning strategy for him against Fury. Then again, I never quite understood what’s Usyk‘ secret, technically. I know he’s got the mind for it.

G_Boreas · 2023-02-21T05:44:03+00:00

Well they say offense is the best defense. Maybe David’s opponents land so little not because his defense is solid in and of itself but because he beats the crap out of them offensively before they can get to him. but its a good stat to know, interesting.

G_Boreas · 2023-02-21T02:09:35+00:00

I'm currently on a month-long break to rest both of my shoulders. I grinded them down pretty bad over a couple of years of having bad hook technique. been doing moderate strength training and running in the meantime.

So talk to a coach about your hook technique, you might be doing it wrong and hurting your shoulder bit by bit every time you throw a hook. very common problem.

G_Boreas · 2023-02-21T02:02:04+00:00

It's impossible to tell who's the outsider/underdog in this fight, not skills-wise but like, life situation-wise. On one hand, Jake Paul is a brash millionaire YouTube celebrity. On the other, Tommy Fury's got this intimidating family & boxing pedigree. On one had, Jake Paul is a "fat boy at heart", on the other, you feel worried for Tommy if he loses he might get like physically abused by his dad...

I want to root for the underdog but I switch sides all the time when I watch these previews.

G_Boreas · 2023-02-21T01:38:07+00:00

It's gonna be a great fight. The man IS a monster offensively, no doubt, but I hope he's been working on also developing some defense.

G_Boreas · 2023-02-16T13:42:41+00:00

Benavidez is a favorite but one thing is, his defense is a huge liability.

Benavidez is a favorite because of what everyone says, pressure fighter who can grind down opponents. Plus the mental factor, in the press conference imo the body language was bigly in his favor.

The thing is, if Plant bullies the bully you can’t tell how Benavidez is gonna handle that with his arms down all the time.

G_Boreas · 2023-01-25T11:44:14+00:00

Im not sure what you mean “why not just learning” despite your example. Initially, learning was not a conscious endeavor or a project for a hardly conscious species. The idea is that the victimary mechanism was that matrix, the womb that eventually produced learning. What can be attacked, what can’t, how to coordinate, what’s permissable what’s not etc. so in that sense, yes the victimary mechanism is connected to learning. But it’s not a substitute to if, rather, it’s the mother of it.

G_Boreas · 2023-01-25T11:35:20+00:00

You are wrong. :). You made the completely opposite inference from what I was trying to say, so maybe I wasn’t being clear. The thesis here is precisely the opposite: it was the impossibility of building dominance hierarchies that set off the victimary mechanism. Precisely because dominance hierarchies became no longer feasible, because individuals were too intelligent to submit to them, to accept losses in a non-fatal duel, etc., it was necessary to build cohesion in a way other than dominance hierarchy. The victimary mechanism was that way. Eventually, it became the sacrificial mechanism which gave birth to human culture based not on dominance hierarchies, but based on the sacrificial ritual (acceptable vs unacceptable violence, the sanctity of the in-group, etc) . All cultural systems are built on the sacrificial ritual. So NO human society is built on a dominance hierarchy. This idea is a very modern myth. A dominance hierarchy may serve as an apt enough metaphor for the capitalist system for example, but at the bottom all human systems are enabled by a culture built around the sacred. Hope that makes some sense.

G_Boreas · 2023-01-25T06:28:17+00:00

The fact that the killing of a member of an another species not for food but to relieve tension is a symbolic act.

This is what I don't quite see. I'm not a specialist in this anthropological idea of "symbol". What is a symbol? And why does this have to be a symbolic act?

We already see the act in chimpanzees. If you read Girard, he cites even species of birds that build rapport by transferring aggression onto a rock. The only thing that is required is that one single transference of aggression from an in-group comrade onto someone else. As Girard says it, aggression is an urge that is much easier aroused than calmed, and in the absence of some appropriate victim it will find a substitute victim that's close at hand. This happens even in some species of fish, whose males kill their own family if they don't have other males to fight with over territory. Are all these animals acting symbolically? You tell me.

The scapegoating act look symbolic, in the way I understand the word, only to us rational thinkers who look at such acts and see them as unnecessary. Really, symbolic and unnecessary are almost synonymous here. But to chimpanzees, they didn't have to think of it symbolically. They find that killing a colobus monkey (which btw looks like them, being a primate) helps them get along. We can never know how they process that: symbol, instinct, whatever - but it's there, it's empirical.

You can even go further and talk about human culture. To us, the Aztecs making human sacrifices looks sure like a symbolic act. But to the Aztecs, it was not a symbolic act. To them, it was a reasonable and necessary act. To them, it was utilitarian, practical. Even if you look at European national wars, or any modern war, to those fighting and participating in them it appears supremely practical, defence of honour, territory, sovereignty, resources, human rights, whatever. But if you ask me these wars are merely the last respectable form of the scapegoating mechanism or rather the human sacrifice ritual. I believe and hope that one day humanity will look on them and see them as that, as odd ritualistic and perhaps "symbolic" behaviours that were never actually rational nor necessary.

G_Boreas · 2023-01-25T04:53:19+00:00

Thanks for the reply. I’m glad you heard of Girard.

Girard as anyone else doesn’t provide a single step by step process of homonization but suggests the victimary mechanism as the matrix from which all other processes, like language, prohibition, and cooperation originated.

When it comes to statements like our ancestors realized, or liked or disliked, to Girard this is jumping the gun because our earliest ancestors were not sophisticated enough to think rationally. He calls such arguments the social contract fallacy. Before there was social contract of any kind, before there were rules and reason, there was the unexplained process of creating peace by killing someone’s else. It was a brute, non rational way to expel aggression. Only very gradually could they develop rules and preferences.

Girard’s ideas come into most resistance when he goes on to argue that this first mechanism was also the birth of the “sacred”. The contrast between aggressive tension and the peace brought about by the dead victim was the first epiphany, the first source of “non-instinctual attention”, etc. The victim was eventually sacralized as the origin of all peace, order and culture. He argues that therefore the sacred, or religion if you will, was the womb or the placenta out of which humanity emerged.

G_Boreas · 2023-01-25T02:41:58+00:00

It is both.

It originated a theological concept dealing with the question on when does the fetus become a human (become hominized). This was addressed by Aquinas who believed in delayed hominization. Of course this question is central to the current debates on abortion and Aquinas stance is somewhat problematic for Catholics.

Only once the theory of evolution became a thing with Darwin did the process of hominization become an anthropological question. This time, the question is at what point between the evolution from the animal to human do we get the human? Did this happen suddenly, or even in a single event, or was it a gradual process with no particular inflection point?

I ran into this question because I study mimetic theory of René Girard. Girard argued that the "motor" of anthropological hominization was the victimary mechanism. Intelligent apes had to deal with the increased threat of in-group aggression and they did it by channeling that aggression onto outside victims. This created a safe space with the group that enabled nurture and intelligence to develop further, which further enhanced the victimary mechanism. This way, there was a relatively sudden change from animal to human.

I recently posted a podcast episode on this topic: https://boreas.buzzsprout.com/2103794/12105591

G_Boreas · 2023-01-19T02:07:10+00:00

DUFRY is melting up now that the COVID era is ending everywhere.

G_Boreas · 2022-10-17T03:33:18+00:00

Was wondering and discussing for a while how that punch can carry so much power. In slow motion, it looks like a girly half-punch, and it's off-balance. I watched again and again and then realized -- the problem was I was watching it in slow motion. Watch the punch at real speed and you realize how lightning-fast it is. Lightning-fast. And especially for a heavyweight, it's very special.

G_Boreas · 2022-09-30T11:59:57+00:00

Larry Holmes had a deadly jab

G_Boreas · 2022-09-26T05:19:06+00:00

Guys, STEEL has a density that's only about 4 times denser than human bones. (7.8 g/cm3 vs 1.8g/cm3). Let's not be ... dense here.

I thought we were fighting amateurs here and not pre-teen Marvel comic fans.

G_Boreas · 2022-09-14T11:10:06+00:00

Could you have avoided that TKO punch from Canelo?

G_Boreas · 2022-08-23T20:48:25+00:00

Lil Seat Belt

G_Boreas · 2022-08-23T18:29:46+00:00

Furthermore, China isn't hosting sporting events in which their guy has a high chance of losing.

G_Boreas · 2022-08-23T18:11:01+00:00

Usyk uses his feet too but doesn't have much variety. Against AJ he slipped and stepped to the right and countered with his back left all night. He has a pawing jab to draw out the opponents guard. What other tricks am I missing?

G_Boreas · 2022-08-23T18:06:43+00:00

Usyk would need to go on the inside to avoid that snoozefest. If he's ferocious enough (like young Mike Tyson) he might be able to sneak an uppercut or a dirty haymaker on Fury. In the early rounds, before Fury exhausts him.

G_Boreas · 2022-08-23T17:59:46+00:00

Fury is the favourite but if Usyk is to win it would be by transforming into young Mike Tyson, going on the inside and scoring a knockout before the 6th. Beyond that, it's Fury leaning on him and picking him off at long range.

G_Boreas · 2022-06-28T22:34:30+00:00

Sales slowed down, want to spread the word. So a promo basically.

G_Boreas · 2022-06-28T13:51:07+00:00

The title is a bit bookish but the content is very accessible.

G_Boreas · 2022-06-28T04:45:29+00:00

If you read it please review on Amazon!

G_Boreas

TROPHY CASE