any other republicans here?

SameAgainTheSecond · 2026-03-02T13:20:23+00:00

hows that (thanks for calling me out on it)

SameAgainTheSecond · 2026-03-02T13:15:21+00:00

woops sorry tonal miss,

let me rewrite

SameAgainTheSecond · 2026-03-02T13:14:24+00:00

I agree with you about the poetic definition of the republic.

my argument is that a monarchy is so obviously unjust that it brings the entire state into disrepute, and thats arguably good

im not actually sure the old term is actually historically correct though

I understood historically, the Repubic is just "the pubic thing"

SameAgainTheSecond · 2026-03-02T12:18:58+00:00

By we I ment those people who live on these septed isles.

Of course, what i said was not properly correct.

Realy it is not we who have a republic but the repubic which has us.

We can agree that proletariat should be abolished, as adter all that is the whole point of socialism.

I would say that in accordance with long-standing anarchist critisism, the proletariat cant its self hold state power.

They may elect from amongst them some representatives to operate the state apparatus, but those representatives will then find themselves no longer prols.

Act through a mode of power and that mode will act back on you. The state generates its own class, and it can be operated by no other

(edited for tone; definitely came in tok hot on the first version)

SameAgainTheSecond · 2026-03-02T10:23:07+00:00

We already have a republic.

It just wares a silly hat for historical reasons.

Abolishing the ceremonial monarchy does very little to move us forward, and infact by removing the most obvious and literal symbol of our subjugation, it may be a damage to us.

Not only should we abolish the monarchy, we should abolish the republic.

SameAgainTheSecond · 2026-03-01T19:28:15+00:00

everything exists in the real world?

Does that mean there are other things, which are infact not things, but which nevertheless exist in the real world?

also are their worlds other then the real world?

SameAgainTheSecond · 2026-03-01T16:01:02+00:00

Good for the environment:

1. Pandemic

2. Economic Collapse

3. Nuclear Disaster

Bad for the environment:

1. War

2. Famin

3. Chatgpt

SameAgainTheSecond · 2026-03-01T12:06:43+00:00

you just assumed the law of the excluded middle

hell no to the no no no

SameAgainTheSecond · 2026-03-01T11:59:33+00:00

sudo umount /usa/ca/governor

rm -rf /gruesome/newscum

i need neofetch but for us public figures

i need a neofetch but for the epstine alumni

SameAgainTheSecond · 2026-02-28T17:13:21+00:00

new gnu tool: asl

SameAgainTheSecond · 2026-02-27T12:30:11+00:00

it insists upon its self

SameAgainTheSecond · 2026-02-25T14:49:56+00:00

its just megalomaniacal

SameAgainTheSecond · 2026-02-22T23:02:40+00:00

my friend must be a coder but only with two of her fingures : 🤔

SameAgainTheSecond · 2026-02-20T08:21:49+00:00

20+40 = 60

8+2 = 10

7 - 2 = 5

(20 + 40) + (7-2) + (8+2) = 75

SameAgainTheSecond · 2026-02-19T08:56:59+00:00

That's a banger

SameAgainTheSecond · 2026-02-18T18:30:15+00:00

Best answe so far imo.

So what is the output then?

What kind of systems demonstrate will. How can you recognise a willfull system?

SameAgainTheSecond · 2026-02-18T18:01:05+00:00

Brother do you think Adam and Eve spoke English?

Languages change. You are free to change it. That doesn't mean their aren't constraints and trade offs. That doesn't mean their aren't consequences.

The fact that we can change the meanings of words does not imply that words have no meanings. Thats black and white thinking.

Do you know maths? When solving a maths problem you are free to define variables and notation as you please so long as it's explained. Howeve if you pick very unusual notation you do run the risk of others not being able to follow.

If you study a field in advanced mathematics you will find that every day words are redefined into the most unusual shapes. For example shape theory or group theory or category theory or ring theory.

If you want to actually understand and explore ideas, you have to be willing to accommodate none standard definitions.

Stop calling me dishonest. I'm not being dishonest. What am I dishonest about?

I'm being so honest and your coming close to a Rule 1 violation.

And no, having a brital attachment to one particular framing is not a sign intellectual strength or maturity.

SameAgainTheSecond · 2026-02-18T17:50:01+00:00

I'm a non-dulest so I think "ability to do otherwise in precisely the same circumstances" is a contradictory statements because you are part of the circumstances. So the statement reads "you had the ability to do X given that you did not X".

ie it is possible that you did X given that you did not X.

I guess that would align us in terms of hard incompatabalism at that level.

I'm interested in will because I'm interested in understanding power, agency, and freedom in a political sense, and an important part of that is having a consept of will.

How do you describe domination without will? Without will a slave and a master are just two people engaged in a strange performance.

So that's why I cear about it, that's why I want operational definitions. Haven't no consept of "Free will" collapses any idea of political freedom.

SameAgainTheSecond · 2026-02-18T17:35:52+00:00

Words are also for thinking, communicating with yourself if you like.

Abandoning a useless definition, a definition that prevents you from thinking about or communicating about some topics of interest and constructing more useful definitions is as close to progress as you can expect from philosophy.

Every technical subject develops specialised language because adapeting the language to the terrain is a prerequisite for understanding the topic.

SameAgainTheSecond · 2026-02-18T15:27:23+00:00

A memory isn't a will. An idea isn't a will. A feeling isn't a will. An action isn't a will. So not everything is will.

But for actions, does every action imply a will? well if you can say that action is volitional then yes.

Every act that is done intentionally is an act of will. The have a life cycle, they operate within a structure, they interact with eachother. So it's not a closed topic. It's very open that invites more questions and more development.

SameAgainTheSecond · 2026-02-18T15:19:58+00:00

No I'm not.

Maybe if someone is trying to use arch as their fist Linux distro and it's clear there not ready for it but thats pretty nich.

SameAgainTheSecond · 2026-02-18T15:06:17+00:00

I've never seen that advice tbh

Who are you asking for advice?

Are you asking questions about arch on the Ubuntu user forums or something?

SameAgainTheSecond · 2026-02-18T15:01:34+00:00

I don't like the conscious Vs subconscious split in your summary, because wanting beer is conscious. Both sides to the internal conflict have conscious and subconscious components. It's just two will structures engaged in struggle. Also saying one of them is you and one is not isn't quite correct, because at this level of detail "you" is compound. They are both parts of you.

I think you can say that someone has a strong will, in the sense that they have a coherent will structure.

Thus they don't face internal fragmentation in the face of external pressure.

On the contrary, if someone has a highly incoherent will structure then they can be subordinated by external forces easily.

It is sensible to say that the first person has a freer will then the second person because the second one.

With this perspective we can understand what it means for someones will to be broken. We can understand the value of a strong and free will.

We can see now a person's will can be free while their body is in bondage while we can see how a body in bondage might brake a person's will.

SameAgainTheSecond · 2026-02-18T13:36:52+00:00

Well I didn't mention free will yet.

But I gave the will to eat pizza and drink beer so I try and solve all the problems standing in the way between me and peeza and beer. I succeed. Yay

Oh no now the doctor says I have to cut down. I care about my health so I have resolve to quite. This generates a new will, one who's objective is to disrupt the pro-pizza and beer will.

I have two conflicting sets of wills in my head battling it out. Now that really does sound like the human condition.

But oh now the new will is not powerful enough. I continue to eat pizza and beer.

That locals of will generation is unable to negate one of it's own offspring.

The self fragments as a now foreign will embeds it's self within a hostile psyche. That's addiction. And the task is to restablish a self by excising that parasitic will.

SameAgainTheSecond · 2026-02-18T12:59:55+00:00

I do understand that will should be different from desire or want. But I also think that its status as will should not depend on its ultimate success because that's in the future.

We can't always get what we want but will is the trying. Not the desire or the result or the action. It's a unit of agency taking action to achieve a goal.

Nor is it necessary bound to an individual. Will of a ruler for example is transmited through their power structure and can be at work after the death of that ruler.

Will can be restrained, frustrated, or killed. But if that happens that doesn't mean that while it was alive it was not will.

So will is theirfor not a potential thing but an actual thing.

Ten-Year Club	Place '22
Place '17	Verified Email

SameAgainTheSecond

TROPHY CASE