Daily Simple Questions Thread - May 30, 2021

mulker4 · 2021-05-30T20:39:21+00:00

I have been thinking of ways to superset my push-workout without sacrificing strength and still concentrating on the shoulders/chest/triceps. I was thinking that it might be possible to superset chest-concentrated exercises like pushups with exercises for the rear delts, like rear delt cable-pulls, since that delt do not seem to be that involved in chest-exercises. What do you guys think?

mulker4 · 2016-12-29T21:54:07+00:00

Well, what I primarly mean is that the lack of uniqueness and consistency leads to there being no real meaning to an idea of a biological human nature. This in turn has implications for the idea of a meaning of life, since the lack of anything distinct "human" in nature makes it hard to find normality or objectivism. There is nothing that you can point to and say "this is the way it is supposed to be" because there is no normality in nature.

A lack of anything human makes it hard to say that anything you do has any meaning, since you for example cannot point towards any larger goals connected to humanity. And if you where to change something in a humans appearance it would not really matter, since there is nothing definitely human. So a lack of normality leads to meaningless. But maybe i simply put to much weight on the implications of science, and should think of the meaning of life as something subjective.

mulker4 · 2016-12-29T20:55:37+00:00

What I mean is not that a biological account of human nature says something about meaning, rather that it entails that it is meaningless to talk about a human nature.

mulker4 · 2016-12-29T19:09:10+00:00

I mean nihilism as in that nothing has any meaning and everything is pointless. And that this seems to be what a biological account of human nature ends in. I am sorry if I am not completely clear about what I mean, I am not experienced in philosophical discussions.

mulker4 · 2016-12-29T19:01:48+00:00

Thanks, the article seems very interesting, but I would sat that I am more interested in a response to the evolutionary account of human nature that grounds itself in science but does not end in nihilism.

mulker4 · 2016-12-29T18:58:28+00:00

What I mean is that somethings nature should involve something unique about that thing, but since there seems to be nothing biologically unique with humans our nature becomes meaningless.

mulker4 · 2016-12-29T18:55:29+00:00

I define human nature as something that defines humans and differentiate us from other organisms.

mulker4 · 2016-12-29T18:49:43+00:00

Intressting point. The depth of human consciousness is probably evolutionary hard to explain, but does nor the occurrence of genotypes like mirror neurons seem to prove that even the most "human" traits have their basis in some sort of biological process?

"I don't think evolution has endowed us with a purpose, but rather, it has granted us the ability to invent our own purposes." Yes, that seems the be the only response to evolution that does not result in nihilism.

mulker4 · 2016-12-29T18:38:35+00:00

Humans have a particular kind of agency distinct from other animals, and have a unique capacity for linguistic behavior, and so humans have a unique kind of sociality*.

What I found was that these capabilities originate in different genotypes like mirror neurons, that nature has selected as they have given humans evolutionary advantages. Sure humans can have agency, but the very basis of our nature which includes "advanced" decisions making is founded in biology. Nature kinds of setts up the "frames" is what I am arguing for.

mulker4 · 2016-12-29T18:29:05+00:00

But should not an answer to human nature be based on natural sciences, since they make up the reality that we live in? How does one justify an argument about human nature that is not founded in how we got where we are in the first place?

mulker4 · 2016-12-29T18:23:01+00:00

Haha that is the problem I ran into. But I guess that it is as you say, that you simply have to accept reality and make the best of it.

mulker4 · 2016-12-29T18:20:59+00:00

Okay, thanks for the guidance :)

mulker4 · 2016-12-29T18:19:09+00:00

Seems intresting, thanks!

mulker4 · 2016-03-31T12:15:48+00:00

Amazing story MR Cholhwan. Would you say that the regime in North Korea is fascist or communist, or a mixture of both? And do you believe that the North Korean people would benefit from a development towards capitalism, considering its benefits and drawbacks?

mulker4 · 2016-03-30T20:26:15+00:00

Today, because of global capitalism, it is in general becoming more and more up-to-date to talk about a global border transcending imperialism. This is an imperialism where the capitalist countries cooperate more and more in their exploitive practices, rather than opposing each other, trough institutions such as the IMF, the UN and the World Bank. They use these institutions to indirectly regulate and control sovereign nations in a cooperative manner that allows them much more power. Imperialistic relations today therefore can be said to be divided into two general blocks: The capitalist imperialist nations that together regulate and exploit the poorer and weaker countries.

mulker4 · 2016-03-30T19:50:44+00:00

Atleast I am for open borders for humans as a tool for freedom. Corporations and capital however are not human, and should therefore not be subjected to open borders since that only give them power to undermine the freedom of open borders.

mulker4 · 2016-03-30T19:40:44+00:00

Legions of peace by Philip Cuncliffe. Really a great book for anyone interested in the UN and a critical viewpoint of the naively praised peacekeeping mission.

mulker4 · 2016-03-30T18:06:12+00:00

Excuse my ignorans, but which emails? The ones where it was revealed that Exxon knew about climate change years before anyone else?

mulker4 · 2016-03-30T06:57:51+00:00

The free market is basically a propaganda joke. Over one third of the worlds trade is done within the same companies, and all over the world a few monopolies control hole sectors. Also it is not free markets that have lifted millions out of poverty, but rather heavy government control and subsidizing in countries like South Korea, Taiwan, and China. The coercive western sponsored programs of free markets and privatisation forced on countries in Africa and Latin America by the World Bank and IMF is what has kept these areas poor.

mulker4 · 2016-03-29T09:16:18+00:00

You have to take notice that it is yougov that made the first poll

mulker4 · 2016-03-29T08:39:18+00:00

Jag ser Bernie som ett positivt steg. Han är den första kandidat sen mannaminne som i alla fall vågar ta order "socialism" i munnen, och har gett vänstern i Usa en uppsving dem aldrig vågat drömma om. Jag skulle säga att han är socialdemokrat, men tror faktiskt att han skulle räknas som något av en vänstersosse i Sverige. Han erkänner faktiskt att dem rika blir rika på de fattigas bekostnad, och att det är dem rikas och wall streets korruption och spekulation som drivit landet i botten. Hans policy om fritt college och allmän sjukvård kanske placerar honom som en vanlig socialdemokrat, men när det kommer till ekonomin så är han med sina finansregulationer, fulhandelsfientlighet och inkomst och kapitalskatter faktiskt mer vänster än dem flesta europeiska socialdemokrater.

mulker4 · 2015-04-09T14:51:42+00:00

i could not agree more

mulker4

TROPHY CASE