[Join our Discord server for even more memes and discussion](https://discord.gg/MFK8PumZM2) Note that all posts need to be manually approved by the subreddit moderators. If your post gets removed immediately, just let it be and wait!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PhilosophyMemes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I'd argue golf is a very good case *for* free will.
I mean. what kind of deterministic universe would result in something so useless and stupid? It has to be a choice
Is it better feel massive amounts of pleasure, but not remember it, or is it better to only have the memory of a pleasure you never actually got? What about pain, but you remember it as pleasure
If being eternally convinced something painful is just about to happen is what some people think hell is, then is heaven just being eternally convinced something good is just around the corner?
Sometimes when I get itchy I wonder if I'm pleasing or hurting myself.
If I don't think about it and just scratch my itch, I won't remember where or when I got such relief or even if the itch actually existed, but there may be signs of what took place even without memory. A rash could spread or some red marks might appear if I scratched my itch. I may become agitated or annoyed if I don't scratch my itch.
Sometimes I let the itch stay to test my perseverance. The anticipation of relief easily gained by a mere scratch or rub turns the itch into a sensation that's no longer what it was. That lingering sensation grows with each moment from a prickly annoyance to an energizing pressure. It sometimes transforms me from being in a state of hell to a state of heaven that still needs the moment of pleasure or pain for resolution.
I don't think I'll ever know if scratching my itch is/was a good or bad thing, so I know something's need to be done without qualifiable concepts. Yet, from this experience, I know it's been better to have and remember these moments than to imagine what could have been.
I think if memory sustains the human experience, then a profoundly impactful memory of pleasure or pain will stay with you much longer than the direct sensation. You’ll be able to feel it and know it secondhand.
Heaven in my view would be better like a lifted veil where our shortsightedness escapes us, and we see things both as they are and ought to be. There wouldn’t be anticipation of goodness, only acceptance and confidence in its persistence.
I think it depends on if your one that exist in the present or in your past memories. For example I’d think if you exist in the present and don’t like pain then pleasure in the present and pain the memories. Vice versa if you tend to linger on the past.
Personally I won’t define heaven or hell that way. But the logical thing would be to follow your thought pattern. A food for thought though, constantly anticipating pleasure but never getting it could be considered hell, depending on who you’re asking.
>Is it better feel massive amounts of pleasure, but not remember it, or is it better to only have the memory of a pleasure you never actually got? What about pain, but you remember it as pleasure
Is it good to feel pleasure at all? We like pleasure, but does that mean its good? Is a person who experiences only pleasure better than a person who experiences a mix of pleasure and pain?
I'd say it's worse to have a false memory since truth is more important than pleasure.
>If being eternally convinced something painful is just about to happen is what some people think hell is, then is heaven just being eternally convinced something good is just around the corner?
Hypothetically maybe, but nothing is forever so you're going to eventually get over the hellish or heavenly anticipations.
Life can be simplified into either pain or pleasure. The absence of pleasure is equal to pain, or at least a painful existence. One may argue that one does not need pleasure to lead a happy life, but is not the state of happiness pleasurable? One may then say that one does not need pleasure to lead a peaceful life at least, but is peace not pleasurable?
It is good to feel pleasure, otherwise you’ll feel nothing but apathy or pain.
Now for the second question as to whether or not it’s better to feel pure pleasure or a mix of pain and pleasure. If we think of this from a practical rather than hypothetical perspective, it is impossible to live a full life without pain or pleasure. Even if your life is horrible, each waking moment being spent in torturous labor or harsh physical abuse, one will still find pleasure in the momentary respite from their pain. Hypothetically, though, I’d say it’s better to live a life with both pain and pleasure for your pain will help you to better appreciate the pleasure. If there is no pain, the pleasure will become dull and eventually one will become apathetic to it, perhaps
>One may argue that one does not need pleasure to lead a happy life, but is not the state of happiness pleasurable? One may then say that one does not need pleasure to lead a peaceful life at least, but is peace not pleasurable?
To the first question, I think qualitatively something like a drug high is a lot different from say the feeling of reward from completing a difficult task. They're both positive emotions, but one is happiness/eudaimonia (satisfaction, peace, etc.), and the other is pleasure (drug high, climax, etc.).
To the second question, pleasure isn't morally wrong imo, but there is some who take an ascetic lifestyle. They are the closest to peace without pleasure. They experience happiness/eudaimonia, but not pleasure (at least not much compared to the modern secular person).
>It is good to feel pleasure, otherwise you’ll feel nothing but apathy or pain.
So why is it bad to feel apathy or pain?
I agree with you for the most part on the mix of pleasure and pain. For those who live in the world and wish to feel pleasure, they have to feel pain as well. No pain means no pleasure. No pleasure means no pain.
It seems to me the ascetics are right in the idea that to escape this cycle of pain and pleasure you have to rid yourself of both, whether through circumstance (isolation from the world) or otherwise. Now whether one should escape the cycle of pain and pleasure? Not sure.
If we wouldn’t remember the pleasure, how could we know we ever had the pleasure? Following that, not remembering the pleasure is equivalent to never experiencing it. I’d rather have the memory of a pleasure I’d never got for I could return to that memory and try to feel that pleasure through the memory much in the same way one feels pleasure in reminiscence.
>Is it better feel massive amounts of pleasure, but not remember it, or is it better to only have the memory of a pleasure you never actually got
The former it doubly better than the latter. Getting a great pleasure feels better than remembering it. It's an advantage to not remember a great pleasure because our memory of greater heights has the effect of diminishing our appreciation of current lesser pleasures and the subsequent striving to achieve them.
>What about pain, but you remember it as pleasure
You should remember pain as pain because usually pain is feedback to not do something damaging to yourself.
>If being eternally convinced something painful is just about to happen is what some people think hell is, then is heaven just being eternally convinced something good is just around the corner?
The anticipation of a good thing is where we are at our most bliss. While achieving the good thing is often met with depression shortly after because what we hope makes us whole usually disappoints us. I'd say the premise is heaven because it gives us the best part of striving without risking the bitter aspects of success.
Because hair is the most important thing in life. You only have so many character points to go around, and it was important they all go into your hair, because having good hair is vital for everything.
If you ever pay attention to movies and start to notice hair patterns dictating who becomes a villain and who a hero you may start to think differently about your hair :P
I've been wondering lately about the relationship between aesthetic experience and moral learning. The language surrounding aesthetic experience is a little slippery. Not really looking for discussion here, but if you're interested look into folks like Louis A Reid (I believe this is the spelling) and folks like Mary Midgley.
Typically Phenomenological ponderings of metaphysical questions. Instead of asking, what is time? I wonder, how is it that we experience time (not to be confused with how do we experience time)? Also a lot of time spent with metaphors and metaphorical conception, and its place in our phenomenal conscious experience. Is there raw experience? Is it always filtered by our metaphorical concepts before being represented in our consciousness or its giveness as experienced?
I'm also day drunk currently.
The people who are the most heard are the two extremes, this just makes everyone more pressed. Also, human empathy is highly selective and a lack of empathy is seen as offensive.
I found all the answers in the sacred texts. You just have to learn them all and then sew them together in to a patchwork blanket. Then look up to the stars and sob in to your blanket.
To answer your question more seriously though. I'm thinking about if you draw a circle. And then draw circles on the perimeter of that circle of the same radius. Then does that mean there are lots of lines that all converge on the same location?
What if that circle is the distance of the observable universe. And what if the circles on that perimeter are emissions of light from a point at the microwave background. Does that mean we are a focal point of electromagnetic radiation that is of a higher frequency than exists at any point around us? At least from our relativistic time frame?
And if that is true. Then what about if it's not just the cosmic microwave background. But all emissions from points within that disc that could converge on our point? Does this have any impact on the physics of our location relative to the points of lower apparent frequency around us?
Step outside of your understanding.
Saying a genius must walk the path of insanity does not mean everyone that walks that path aims for the same destination.
Do we overestimate the value of things we've lost, thinking back to them, or underestimate the value of things we still have, or is there a secret 3rd option?
Why is it that when I drive for a long time my mind tends to wander off, even have vivid day dreams but I maintain perfect control of my vehicle while staring at the back of the car in front of me.
I have been wondering that if life is full of suffering then why to have kids and make them suffer too.
What it is that we all want , humans not to get extinct in the future. We are suffering from centuries and nothing has changed.
Hear me out.. What if .. In the asteroid that wiped the dinosaurs was actually not a asteroid it was the start of a nukeclear war?! And what if theose dinasours were actually advanced robots and ai maybe shape shifting onse too ?! What if the sun was actually artificially created and not natural? What if we humans used to actually live on mars but a nukeclear war happened there then most of the highly educated and important mindes moved to other planets then created us humans again and created this planet and sent us on to and created othwr species and trees and many other ? What if the moon is actually holding this planet together because it has a huge magnet and the moon is a huge metal structure to keep the eqrth in its place? .. What if There are already advanced humans living here under earth and they have civilizations and don't care about the out side world?
Is there a relationship between understanding and learning?
can one learn how to learn?
what means understanding something?
is learning related to one's faculty of reasonability?
I am into that shit, I like philosophy but I ~~feel~~ *know* I am quite dumb.
How do we know we're real, also what happens after death. I am a Christian yes. But say if I was to go to heaven or hell I would have to go for eternity and I can't wrap my head around eternity because eternity means forever and endless it's infinite. I can't imagine being in one realm one place forever if I don't believe in reincarnation or anything of that sort so when I die if I go to heaven that's it that's all there is, but wouldn't I get bored? That's only if I go to heaven. If I go to hell then I would have to endure endless suffering and despair. Life is a cycle of mistakes and tragedy, and death is unknown and terrifying. What a lovely multiverse we live in.
How to get into privileged upper class and lead luxurious existence without work
Take Kimi Raikkonen for example, I want to live like he does and I do not want to be told that I do not need that super yacht.
The thing is, you can get pretty rich, reliably, with a lot of fucking work. Become a doctor, a lawyer, or an investment banker. These basically guarantee a six figure paycheck, at the cost of your youth and sanity (I'm a med student, send help). But to become really, really rich, or to become rich without working yourself halt to death, you need luck. You either need to be born wealthy, have a viable idea for a company that takes off, or have some sort of special talent like acting, writing, or sports, that allows you to succeed in the labour aristocracy.
I was thinking I should have done law instead of IT as it pays more and much easier. I looked through several laws for different reasons relevant to my life. Sure they are written in complex language compare to normal speech but its nothing compare to programming code, IT has to deal with. Actually language of laws and programmer's code are somewhat similar in how they are written.
Or I should have travelled to where they have software engineering jobs.
At this stage only investment banker could work for me
not doctor because I do not want to deal with sick, pesky patients, eeek
Some things to consider about law:
- It is really, really hard. There's a reason not everyone does it. Sure, the work itself is okay, but the training you need to get there is grueling. Definitely a lot harder than your average CS degree.
- It's pretty non-transferable. Sure, there are some basic skills that apply all across the globe, but otherwise, you're stuck with the country whose laws you know. If you want to move, get ready to learn everything again, or pick a different career. This is unlike IT and medicine, which are basically the same skills everywhere, and investment banking, which is a creation of global capitalism anyway, so borders barely matter there.
Anyway, all things considered, an IT background is still a good basis for getting into the "pretty rich" category. If I were you, I'd simply try to find the best opportunities within that.
Few places actually develop software, like say Microsoft makes Windows or MS Office or Oracle their database. These jobs do not exist in every city or country.
Most people need IT helpdesk (technician). This job is low paid and low skilled babysitting of idiots that I would not want to do. I think Tafe trains them in a year or so.
Some need System Administrator who sets up and then manages to the whole network, but these jobs are not that many.
There is also Website Development, but its CMS, such as Wordpress nowadays. That means idiots can do it and now this job is not about tech ability but rather about convincing clients to shell out money.
All in all its not good for a Software Developer (Software Engineer). I can do System Administrator too, but the rest of IT roles are shit not worth the time and effort.
IT is not a single profession, there are many subdisciplines that have little in common with each other. Only Software Developers and maybe SysAdmins can make good money in IT and these jobs are few. However even having SysAdmin experience would be completely useless for Software Developer, they will not even look at IT helpdesk.
At the very basic level, matter arranged into certain configuration (the body and the brain) where it is ‘aware’ by being perceptive of stimuli. Now if we are successful in building an AGI then it will further prove that consciousness just a result of matter.
[Join our Discord server for even more memes and discussion](https://discord.gg/MFK8PumZM2) Note that all posts need to be manually approved by the subreddit moderators. If your post gets removed immediately, just let it be and wait! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PhilosophyMemes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If humans really have free will, then why do they golf?
It’s a good argument against free will. Only the pre-existing material conditions can make someone take up golfing.
This is something I've asked for decades.
I'd argue golf is a very good case *for* free will. I mean. what kind of deterministic universe would result in something so useless and stupid? It has to be a choice
Idk but my friend (30m) just fell in love with golf
I think it’s just a canon event for 30 year old rich white men. But if your friend isn’t rich/white then idk they just weird bro
White, not rich. It's a little weird.
He should stick to mini golf then.
As a struggling white dude, mini golf is the best.
Hello from a fellow mini golf sticker. One day we’ll make it to golf!
So called Free Thinker's life goal being to play golf:
Golf is 1) great. 2) created by the gods that condemned Camu's iteration of Sisyphus.
Is it better feel massive amounts of pleasure, but not remember it, or is it better to only have the memory of a pleasure you never actually got? What about pain, but you remember it as pleasure If being eternally convinced something painful is just about to happen is what some people think hell is, then is heaven just being eternally convinced something good is just around the corner?
Sometimes when I get itchy I wonder if I'm pleasing or hurting myself. If I don't think about it and just scratch my itch, I won't remember where or when I got such relief or even if the itch actually existed, but there may be signs of what took place even without memory. A rash could spread or some red marks might appear if I scratched my itch. I may become agitated or annoyed if I don't scratch my itch. Sometimes I let the itch stay to test my perseverance. The anticipation of relief easily gained by a mere scratch or rub turns the itch into a sensation that's no longer what it was. That lingering sensation grows with each moment from a prickly annoyance to an energizing pressure. It sometimes transforms me from being in a state of hell to a state of heaven that still needs the moment of pleasure or pain for resolution. I don't think I'll ever know if scratching my itch is/was a good or bad thing, so I know something's need to be done without qualifiable concepts. Yet, from this experience, I know it's been better to have and remember these moments than to imagine what could have been.
Bro edging his itch
I think if memory sustains the human experience, then a profoundly impactful memory of pleasure or pain will stay with you much longer than the direct sensation. You’ll be able to feel it and know it secondhand. Heaven in my view would be better like a lifted veil where our shortsightedness escapes us, and we see things both as they are and ought to be. There wouldn’t be anticipation of goodness, only acceptance and confidence in its persistence.
I think it depends on if your one that exist in the present or in your past memories. For example I’d think if you exist in the present and don’t like pain then pleasure in the present and pain the memories. Vice versa if you tend to linger on the past. Personally I won’t define heaven or hell that way. But the logical thing would be to follow your thought pattern. A food for thought though, constantly anticipating pleasure but never getting it could be considered hell, depending on who you’re asking.
This feels like part of a Platonic dialogue attacking pleasure as the highest good (well done!)
>Is it better feel massive amounts of pleasure, but not remember it, or is it better to only have the memory of a pleasure you never actually got? What about pain, but you remember it as pleasure Is it good to feel pleasure at all? We like pleasure, but does that mean its good? Is a person who experiences only pleasure better than a person who experiences a mix of pleasure and pain? I'd say it's worse to have a false memory since truth is more important than pleasure. >If being eternally convinced something painful is just about to happen is what some people think hell is, then is heaven just being eternally convinced something good is just around the corner? Hypothetically maybe, but nothing is forever so you're going to eventually get over the hellish or heavenly anticipations.
Life can be simplified into either pain or pleasure. The absence of pleasure is equal to pain, or at least a painful existence. One may argue that one does not need pleasure to lead a happy life, but is not the state of happiness pleasurable? One may then say that one does not need pleasure to lead a peaceful life at least, but is peace not pleasurable? It is good to feel pleasure, otherwise you’ll feel nothing but apathy or pain. Now for the second question as to whether or not it’s better to feel pure pleasure or a mix of pain and pleasure. If we think of this from a practical rather than hypothetical perspective, it is impossible to live a full life without pain or pleasure. Even if your life is horrible, each waking moment being spent in torturous labor or harsh physical abuse, one will still find pleasure in the momentary respite from their pain. Hypothetically, though, I’d say it’s better to live a life with both pain and pleasure for your pain will help you to better appreciate the pleasure. If there is no pain, the pleasure will become dull and eventually one will become apathetic to it, perhaps
>One may argue that one does not need pleasure to lead a happy life, but is not the state of happiness pleasurable? One may then say that one does not need pleasure to lead a peaceful life at least, but is peace not pleasurable? To the first question, I think qualitatively something like a drug high is a lot different from say the feeling of reward from completing a difficult task. They're both positive emotions, but one is happiness/eudaimonia (satisfaction, peace, etc.), and the other is pleasure (drug high, climax, etc.). To the second question, pleasure isn't morally wrong imo, but there is some who take an ascetic lifestyle. They are the closest to peace without pleasure. They experience happiness/eudaimonia, but not pleasure (at least not much compared to the modern secular person). >It is good to feel pleasure, otherwise you’ll feel nothing but apathy or pain. So why is it bad to feel apathy or pain? I agree with you for the most part on the mix of pleasure and pain. For those who live in the world and wish to feel pleasure, they have to feel pain as well. No pain means no pleasure. No pleasure means no pain. It seems to me the ascetics are right in the idea that to escape this cycle of pain and pleasure you have to rid yourself of both, whether through circumstance (isolation from the world) or otherwise. Now whether one should escape the cycle of pain and pleasure? Not sure.
If we wouldn’t remember the pleasure, how could we know we ever had the pleasure? Following that, not remembering the pleasure is equivalent to never experiencing it. I’d rather have the memory of a pleasure I’d never got for I could return to that memory and try to feel that pleasure through the memory much in the same way one feels pleasure in reminiscence.
>Is it better feel massive amounts of pleasure, but not remember it, or is it better to only have the memory of a pleasure you never actually got The former it doubly better than the latter. Getting a great pleasure feels better than remembering it. It's an advantage to not remember a great pleasure because our memory of greater heights has the effect of diminishing our appreciation of current lesser pleasures and the subsequent striving to achieve them. >What about pain, but you remember it as pleasure You should remember pain as pain because usually pain is feedback to not do something damaging to yourself. >If being eternally convinced something painful is just about to happen is what some people think hell is, then is heaven just being eternally convinced something good is just around the corner? The anticipation of a good thing is where we are at our most bliss. While achieving the good thing is often met with depression shortly after because what we hope makes us whole usually disappoints us. I'd say the premise is heaven because it gives us the best part of striving without risking the bitter aspects of success.
Why did I decide to roll a 1 on everything else in life just to have perfect hair
Because hair is the most important thing in life. You only have so many character points to go around, and it was important they all go into your hair, because having good hair is vital for everything.
Hair is everything! https://youtu.be/q97iIDx-b7U?si=zYlozxE3eP5Hj0fn
Ooh this show looks like fun 😊
Oh yeah I definitely recommend fleabag, great show
If you ever pay attention to movies and start to notice hair patterns dictating who becomes a villain and who a hero you may start to think differently about your hair :P
That evil pattern baldness
Why?
Why not
Because The Philosophy Of Redemption
I've been wondering lately about the relationship between aesthetic experience and moral learning. The language surrounding aesthetic experience is a little slippery. Not really looking for discussion here, but if you're interested look into folks like Louis A Reid (I believe this is the spelling) and folks like Mary Midgley.
Why am I so f'ing deep?
Cause you’re 14?!
Cuz this comment was posted 14 hours ago. Answer Given. Opponent disillusioned.😎😎😎😎
Typically Phenomenological ponderings of metaphysical questions. Instead of asking, what is time? I wonder, how is it that we experience time (not to be confused with how do we experience time)? Also a lot of time spent with metaphors and metaphorical conception, and its place in our phenomenal conscious experience. Is there raw experience? Is it always filtered by our metaphorical concepts before being represented in our consciousness or its giveness as experienced? I'm also day drunk currently.
Could ye clarify what difference there is between "how is it that we experience" and "how do we experience" for the non-native speaker plebs?
How is it that = how is it possible. How = in what way.
Why can’t people stop being assholes to each other when the our own government is shitting on all of us as a whole.
Because people don't understand that governments are made of people. You can't expect a large mass of people to be perfectly efficient.
The people who are the most heard are the two extremes, this just makes everyone more pressed. Also, human empathy is highly selective and a lack of empathy is seen as offensive.
I found all the answers in the sacred texts. You just have to learn them all and then sew them together in to a patchwork blanket. Then look up to the stars and sob in to your blanket. To answer your question more seriously though. I'm thinking about if you draw a circle. And then draw circles on the perimeter of that circle of the same radius. Then does that mean there are lots of lines that all converge on the same location? What if that circle is the distance of the observable universe. And what if the circles on that perimeter are emissions of light from a point at the microwave background. Does that mean we are a focal point of electromagnetic radiation that is of a higher frequency than exists at any point around us? At least from our relativistic time frame? And if that is true. Then what about if it's not just the cosmic microwave background. But all emissions from points within that disc that could converge on our point? Does this have any impact on the physics of our location relative to the points of lower apparent frequency around us?
[удалено]
Why? What's troubling you brother??
Why are galactic filaments so very similar to neural structures. And how can we make neural structures at the atomic scale.
Until now. Look no further my child: “Because”
Currently, that one
And then do you know you’ve gone insane. But also remember, a genius must walk the path of insanity before recognition.
Lots of geniuses in wait of recognition in the psych wards then.
Step outside of your understanding. Saying a genius must walk the path of insanity does not mean everyone that walks that path aims for the same destination.
Do we overestimate the value of things we've lost, thinking back to them, or underestimate the value of things we still have, or is there a secret 3rd option?
Why is it that when I drive for a long time my mind tends to wander off, even have vivid day dreams but I maintain perfect control of my vehicle while staring at the back of the car in front of me.
Is everything inevitable? (Yes because I'm coping)
in a rich mans house there is no where to spit except his face.
seggration between the self , consciousness and religion. how to fix my life are we living in a simulation
Are you pondering what I'm pondering?
Are you pondering what I'm pondering?
is a epic burger still epic if it isn't eaten?
I have been wondering that if life is full of suffering then why to have kids and make them suffer too. What it is that we all want , humans not to get extinct in the future. We are suffering from centuries and nothing has changed.
Hahahahaha loool
"Why?"
"Is it better to piss in the sink or sink in the piss?"
Why do I crave companionship whilst dreading it?
Hear me out.. What if .. In the asteroid that wiped the dinosaurs was actually not a asteroid it was the start of a nukeclear war?! And what if theose dinasours were actually advanced robots and ai maybe shape shifting onse too ?! What if the sun was actually artificially created and not natural? What if we humans used to actually live on mars but a nukeclear war happened there then most of the highly educated and important mindes moved to other planets then created us humans again and created this planet and sent us on to and created othwr species and trees and many other ? What if the moon is actually holding this planet together because it has a huge magnet and the moon is a huge metal structure to keep the eqrth in its place? .. What if There are already advanced humans living here under earth and they have civilizations and don't care about the out side world?
Do bullies watch movies about bullies and think they’re the good guy in the movie?
When will the simulation be tweaked, I want the post scarcity DLC
Is there a relationship between understanding and learning? can one learn how to learn? what means understanding something? is learning related to one's faculty of reasonability? I am into that shit, I like philosophy but I ~~feel~~ *know* I am quite dumb.
lately about earth and the environment. WHY?
Why is yellow?
Why do people buy so much crap?
He should stick to mini golf
Is the opposite of spicyness mint?
Ig it's sweetness
If everything in motion a sound, what would the planets sound like if you could hear them?
Why are emojis yellow why can't they be purple
How do we know we're real, also what happens after death. I am a Christian yes. But say if I was to go to heaven or hell I would have to go for eternity and I can't wrap my head around eternity because eternity means forever and endless it's infinite. I can't imagine being in one realm one place forever if I don't believe in reincarnation or anything of that sort so when I die if I go to heaven that's it that's all there is, but wouldn't I get bored? That's only if I go to heaven. If I go to hell then I would have to endure endless suffering and despair. Life is a cycle of mistakes and tragedy, and death is unknown and terrifying. What a lovely multiverse we live in.
Where’s the TRUTH????
How to get into privileged upper class and lead luxurious existence without work Take Kimi Raikkonen for example, I want to live like he does and I do not want to be told that I do not need that super yacht.
The thing is, you can get pretty rich, reliably, with a lot of fucking work. Become a doctor, a lawyer, or an investment banker. These basically guarantee a six figure paycheck, at the cost of your youth and sanity (I'm a med student, send help). But to become really, really rich, or to become rich without working yourself halt to death, you need luck. You either need to be born wealthy, have a viable idea for a company that takes off, or have some sort of special talent like acting, writing, or sports, that allows you to succeed in the labour aristocracy.
I was thinking I should have done law instead of IT as it pays more and much easier. I looked through several laws for different reasons relevant to my life. Sure they are written in complex language compare to normal speech but its nothing compare to programming code, IT has to deal with. Actually language of laws and programmer's code are somewhat similar in how they are written. Or I should have travelled to where they have software engineering jobs. At this stage only investment banker could work for me not doctor because I do not want to deal with sick, pesky patients, eeek
Some things to consider about law: - It is really, really hard. There's a reason not everyone does it. Sure, the work itself is okay, but the training you need to get there is grueling. Definitely a lot harder than your average CS degree. - It's pretty non-transferable. Sure, there are some basic skills that apply all across the globe, but otherwise, you're stuck with the country whose laws you know. If you want to move, get ready to learn everything again, or pick a different career. This is unlike IT and medicine, which are basically the same skills everywhere, and investment banking, which is a creation of global capitalism anyway, so borders barely matter there. Anyway, all things considered, an IT background is still a good basis for getting into the "pretty rich" category. If I were you, I'd simply try to find the best opportunities within that.
Few places actually develop software, like say Microsoft makes Windows or MS Office or Oracle their database. These jobs do not exist in every city or country. Most people need IT helpdesk (technician). This job is low paid and low skilled babysitting of idiots that I would not want to do. I think Tafe trains them in a year or so. Some need System Administrator who sets up and then manages to the whole network, but these jobs are not that many. There is also Website Development, but its CMS, such as Wordpress nowadays. That means idiots can do it and now this job is not about tech ability but rather about convincing clients to shell out money. All in all its not good for a Software Developer (Software Engineer). I can do System Administrator too, but the rest of IT roles are shit not worth the time and effort. IT is not a single profession, there are many subdisciplines that have little in common with each other. Only Software Developers and maybe SysAdmins can make good money in IT and these jobs are few. However even having SysAdmin experience would be completely useless for Software Developer, they will not even look at IT helpdesk.
What the f Is consciousness.
I think it takes more faith to believe an explanation that doesn’t involve God
At the very basic level, matter arranged into certain configuration (the body and the brain) where it is ‘aware’ by being perceptive of stimuli. Now if we are successful in building an AGI then it will further prove that consciousness just a result of matter.
Nah.😎😎😎😎
What dualism does to mf.
It is metaphysicaly necessary for all of us (dualists) to wear sunglasses. It's a small price to pay for facts.😎😎
Dualist mfs explaining why God of the gaps is a totally defensible position when it comes specifically to neurology:
If I ate a cheese croissant at the DMV and I owe my cousin 8 dollars, why am I Italian?
How get more peepee touches