Example of a psychology article critique
'MURICA! FUCK YEAH!
2012.05.09 04:18 arthurlockman 'MURICA! FUCK YEAH!
the good, the bad, and the ugly
2008.03.08 23:54 Psychology
A Reddit community for sharing and discussing science-based psychological material.
2009.08.12 00:59 ElXGaspeth Secure, Contain, Protect Official subreddit of the scpwiki.com collaborative fiction project
Secure, Contain, Protect Official subreddit of the SCP Wiki collaborative-fiction project scpwiki.com
2024.05.14 17:34 tolkienfan2759 How concerned are you about disinformation (or misinformation) and how does that interact with your feelings about freedom of speech?
This won't be news, of course, but apparently Trump and his allies lied a lot about who won the 2020 election. There are a lot of lies on the left, as well, that burn my beans to a greater or lesser extent - calling not wanting to use government money to buy books "book banning," for example, or seeming to imply (by calling others racist) that you think you're not one, or that doing so is going to reduce racism by one or two iotas, or calling a climate change bill an Inflation Reduction Act. (Just letting you all know, I know there are lies on both sides, and this is all relevant to centrist politics.)
The Economist last week had a couple of articles on the topic. It was interesting to learn that in poor countries (the newspaper didn't name any names) you can make a profession of building up user accounts to 100,000 followers, or so, and then selling them. That fake followers can apparently be bought in bulk. That our government has numerous agencies that work to oppose disinformation. (Apparently DARPA funds various efforts in this regard, and the State Dept has at least one agency that works on it.)
One thing the articles didn't mention is freedom of speech. Does it matter, to you, who is lying to you? Whether it's a Russian bot or our President? Should we oppose the one but overlook the other? Does it really matter, any of it? I mean, suppose Russian interference works to elect Trump, and Chinese interference works to elect Biden (I'm not suggesting that it did, just that it might) - isn't this really just giving people a voice who feel they ought to have one? I mean, our government's decisions impact the whole world. Do citizens of other countries really have no right to a say in that? Talking about right and wrong, now, not something we could potentially legislate about... I know, it's not well focused, but I'm hoping some of you will have interesting ideas....
submitted by tolkienfan2759 to centrist [link] [comments]
The Economist last week had a couple of articles on the topic. It was interesting to learn that in poor countries (the newspaper didn't name any names) you can make a profession of building up user accounts to 100,000 followers, or so, and then selling them. That fake followers can apparently be bought in bulk. That our government has numerous agencies that work to oppose disinformation. (Apparently DARPA funds various efforts in this regard, and the State Dept has at least one agency that works on it.)
One thing the articles didn't mention is freedom of speech. Does it matter, to you, who is lying to you? Whether it's a Russian bot or our President? Should we oppose the one but overlook the other? Does it really matter, any of it? I mean, suppose Russian interference works to elect Trump, and Chinese interference works to elect Biden (I'm not suggesting that it did, just that it might) - isn't this really just giving people a voice who feel they ought to have one? I mean, our government's decisions impact the whole world. Do citizens of other countries really have no right to a say in that? Talking about right and wrong, now, not something we could potentially legislate about... I know, it's not well focused, but I'm hoping some of you will have interesting ideas....
2024.05.14 17:27 Thinker_Assignment Introducing the dltHub declarative REST API Source toolkit – directly in Python!
Hey folks, I’m Adrian, co-founder and data engineer at dltHub.
My team and I are excited to share a tool we believe could transform how we all approach data pipelines:
The Rest APIClient is the collection of helpers that powers the source and can be used as standalone, high level imperative pipeline builder. This makes your life easier without locking you into a rigid framework.
Read more about it in our blog article (colab notebook demo, docs links, workflow walkthrough inside)
About dlt:
Quick context in case you don’t know dlt – it's an open source Python library for data folks who build pipelines, that’s designed to be as intuitive as possible. It handles schema changes dynamically and scales well as your data grows.
Why is this new toolkit awesome?
Feedback Request: We’d like you to try it with your use cases and give us honest constructive feedback. We had some internal hackathons and already roughened out the edges, and it’s time to get broader feedback about what you like and what you are missing.
The immediate future:
Generating sources. We have been playing with the idea to algorithmically generate pipelines from OpenAPI specs and it looks good so far and we will show something in a couple of weeks. Algorithmically means AI free and accurate, so that’s neat.
But as we all know, every day someone ignores standards and reinvents yet another flat tyre in the world of software. For those cases we are looking at LLM-enhanced development, that assists a data engineer to work faster through the usual decisions taken when building a pipeline. I’m super excited for what the future holds for our field and I hope you are too.
Thank you!
Thanks for checking this out, and I can’t wait to see your thoughts and suggestions! If you want to discuss or share your work, join our Slack community.
submitted by Thinker_Assignment to dataengineering [link] [comments]
My team and I are excited to share a tool we believe could transform how we all approach data pipelines:
REST API Source toolkit
The REST API Source brings a Pythonic, declarative configuration approach to pipeline creation, simplifying the process while keeping flexibility.The Rest APIClient is the collection of helpers that powers the source and can be used as standalone, high level imperative pipeline builder. This makes your life easier without locking you into a rigid framework.
Read more about it in our blog article (colab notebook demo, docs links, workflow walkthrough inside)
About dlt:
Quick context in case you don’t know dlt – it's an open source Python library for data folks who build pipelines, that’s designed to be as intuitive as possible. It handles schema changes dynamically and scales well as your data grows.
Why is this new toolkit awesome?
- Simple configuration: Quickly set up robust pipelines with minimal code, while staying in Python only. No containers, no multi-step scaffolding, just config your script and run.
- Real-time adaptability: Schema and pagination strategy can be autodetected at runtime or pre-defined.
- Towards community standards: dlt’s schema is already db agnostic, enabling cross-db transform packages to be standardised on top (example). By adding a declarative source approach, we simplify the engineering challenge further, enabling more builders to leverage the tool and community.
We’re community driven and Open Source
We had help from several community members, from start to finish. We got prompted in this direction by a community code donation last year, and we finally wrapped it up thanks to the pull and help from two more community members.Feedback Request: We’d like you to try it with your use cases and give us honest constructive feedback. We had some internal hackathons and already roughened out the edges, and it’s time to get broader feedback about what you like and what you are missing.
The immediate future:
Generating sources. We have been playing with the idea to algorithmically generate pipelines from OpenAPI specs and it looks good so far and we will show something in a couple of weeks. Algorithmically means AI free and accurate, so that’s neat.
But as we all know, every day someone ignores standards and reinvents yet another flat tyre in the world of software. For those cases we are looking at LLM-enhanced development, that assists a data engineer to work faster through the usual decisions taken when building a pipeline. I’m super excited for what the future holds for our field and I hope you are too.
Thank you!
Thanks for checking this out, and I can’t wait to see your thoughts and suggestions! If you want to discuss or share your work, join our Slack community.
2024.05.14 17:05 kayakero Stochastic Oscillator – How does it work and how to use it in trading?
 | What is the stochastic oscillator?A stochastic oscillator chart allows you to identify momentum in the price of a financial asset. At the core of this indicator is the stochastic oscillator formula. What it does is compare the closing price of a security with the recent high and low prices. It then converts it to a figure between 0 and 100, which is the actual value of the stochastic oscillator.Let's say you talk to two traders independently and ask them what the stochastic oscillator shows. You will most likely get two very different answers. On the one hand, the stochastic oscillator is an indicator of both up and down momentum. On the other hand, some traders may see it as an indicator of overbought and oversold prices. Both explanations are correct in theory. The fundamental difference lies in how you use the indicator within your investment strategy. https://preview.redd.it/75cd3582pe0d1.png?width=623&format=png&auto=webp&s=7f594c2024beede3d8096e690387ae660095b242 There are other factors to take into account. One of them is the period during which the low price and the high price are taken. You will need to research the ideal indicator settings for your particular trading method. Are you happy to opt for a flatter long-term trend? Alternatively, would you prefer a more sensitive short-term indicator that could alert you to short-term trading opportunities? A brief history There is some debate about the origins of the stochastic oscillator. Especially the %D indicators which we will cover later in this article. Many believe that C. Ralph Dystant was the original creator of the indicator. However, George C. Lane is perhaps more commonly credited with playing his role in popularizing it. The latter also introduced several tweaks and adjustments. We can trace the stochastic oscillator itself back to the 1950s, when C. Ralph Dystant taught courses on the stock market. In these courses, his original focus was on commodities. The classes were one of the first to focus on charts, moving averages, and other indicators as a means of attempting to predict future price movements. By the way, George C. Lane supposedly started working for C Ralph Dystant in 1954. That was the same year that technical “guru” Roy Larson retired. It was a coincidence? It would be fair to say that both C. Ralph Dystant, and George C. Lane, were integral to the creation of the stochastic oscillator indicator and the influence it still has on investors today. In many ways, the key to its success is its relative simplicity. The masterstroke introduced an easy-to-understand range between zero and 100. In the words of Kelly Johnson, former principal engineer at Lockheed Skunk Works, “keep it simple, stupid.” Many traders today refer to this quote as the KISS principle, because in English it would be “keep it simple, stupid.” How does the stochastic oscillator work? Now let's examine how the stochastic oscillator works. We'll also see how quickly you can adjust the sensitivity of the indicator. The basic concept behind the stochastic oscillator is momentum. It gives you the ability to monitor the price momentum of an asset. Doing so allows you to see if, compared to recent highs and lows, you are potentially oversold or overbought. However, therein lies a potential conundrum. A simple exampleWhat if we look at the S&P 500? The E-Mini S&P 500 futures contract is among the highest volume assets in the futures market. What will its momentum show us if we look at it? Imagine the example of shooting a rocket into the sky. It will not stop suddenly and return to earth immediately after running out of fuel. The fading momentum will continue to push you higher at a drastically decreasing speed. However, when the positive momentum finally ends, the rocket will spin and head toward the earth. As a result, you gain new momentum along the way. This is the idea behind the stochastic oscillator. Using the recent highs and lows, for comparison, you should be able to identify a change in momentum. That result should also be reflected in the graphs.There is a general consensus that when stochastic oscillator levels fall below 20, it indicates that the asset is oversold. Meanwhile, if it moves above 80, that indicates that the asset is overbought. Let's take 50 as our average value. In theory, positive momentum is above the line, while negative momentum is below it. Although this is often the case, you should be on the lookout for potential false signals. Now let's go ahead and take a look at the ways to read and understand the Stochastic Oscillator indicator. Stochastic Oscillator Formula and CalculationIn this section, we will look at the stochastic oscillator formula. We'll also point out which elements of the formula you can adjust to change the sensitivity. The formula is the following:C = the most recent closing price L14 = the lowest price traded during the last 14 trading sessions H14 = the highest price traded during the last 14 trading sessions %K = the current value of the stochastic indicator as a percentage To give a practical example of how the indicator works, we will look at the S&P 500 index. This is the figure on which the E-mini S&P 500 futures contracts are based. Current level = 3490 Low point in the last 14 trading sessions = 3300 High point in the last 14 trading sessions = 3500 The calculation is as follows: 3490-3300/3500-3300 = 190/200 (190/200) x 100 = 95% ExampleSo, according to the Stochastic Oscillator indicator, the S&P 500 Index has strong momentum and is in possible “overbought” territory. Many people would classify this as the standard stochastic oscillator indicator calculation based on 14 trading sessions. However, what does the situation look like based on eight trading sessions?Current level = 3490 Low point in the last 8 trading sessions = 3400 High point in the last 8 trading sessions = 3500 3490-3400/3500-3400 = 90/100 (90/100) x 100 = 90% Finally, what indication does the calculation with a 30-period moving average give us? Current level = 3490 Low point in the last 30 trading sessions = 3200 High point in the last 8 trading sessions = 3500 3490-3200/3500-3200 = 290/300 (290/300) x 100 = 97% The shorter the period in question, the more sensitive the formula will be to daily movements. The reason is that the difference between the maximum and minimum point should be relatively small, in theory. In the three examples above, the S&P 500 index has strong momentum for 14 and 30 days. However, it is noticeably lower if you only look at it over 8 days. And, on the other hand, they all indicate a potentially overbought scenario. How to read stochastic oscillator charts?Next, let's take a look at two stochastic oscillator indicator charts. We will highlight some of the turning points that could have been beneficial for traders. The first chart is the traditional (fast) stochastic oscillator indicator with a smoother %D trend line based on the %K factor.https://preview.redd.it/vzf6c7wfme0d1.png?width=1377&format=png&auto=webp&s=512182433e3783fa53bcf9fad33fbc81b5a40bef The second chart is what we call a “slow stochastic oscillator indicator”. It averages the index level over a longer period. Then we have the %D factor, which is based on the %K and gives an even smoother line. The longer the period over which prices are examined, including high, low and current prices, the smoother the chart will be. However, there will be a significant delay. On the plus side, in many ways, this can help offset the short-term peaks and troughs that can sometimes tempt people to buy and sell when they shouldn't. https://preview.redd.it/b7k655aime0d1.png?width=1420&format=png&auto=webp&s=ee2a182215d415eb4e5f7b8e528b81247e601a2a How to use the stochastic oscillator?The key to using the stochastic oscillator is finding the time frame that best suits your investment strategy. Those looking for short-term trading will focus on relatively short periods, which can lead to somewhat volatile changes in the indicator. Those looking for confirmation of longer-term trends will extend the period in question. These graphs will be smoother and, due to the long delay, are not as susceptible to short-term changes.What are the best and most accurate settings?There are three variables to consider when looking at the stochastic oscillator setup, which are:%K = based on the number of time periods used in the calculation Slowdown = simple moving average (SMA) factor applied to %K %D = %K moving average factor As we mentioned earlier, the stochastic oscillator has three different types. Among them are: The Fast Stochastic Oscillator (Traditional Indicator)Fast %K = basic %K calculation for 14 periodsFast %D = Fast Stochastic Oscillator Three-Period SMA %K The slow stochastic oscillatorSlow %K = Fast %K expressed as three-period SMASlow %D = Slow %K three-period SMA The Complete Stochastic Oscillator%K full = %K fast smoothed over a period X SMAFull %D = Full %K Period X SMA The beauty of this system is the fact that all previous variations of the original indicator produce figures from 0 to 100. As a result, it is easy to compare and contrast the variation in the trend lines. The longer the periods in which you calculate the simple moving average, the smoother the line will be. As we mentioned above, the simple fast stochastic oscillator will throw up many possible overbought and oversold positions. Some of them will inevitably be false signals. As you can see from the charts above, the Fast Stochastic Oscillator can be quite volatile, frequently trading above or below the 80 and 20 levels for a short period of time. On the same chart, you can see areas where the %D (SMA figure) is not as volatile and does not always fall below or move above the 80 or 20 levels like the Fast Stochastic Oscillator does. Trading strategies with the stochastic oscillatorThere are many ways you can use the stochastic oscillator indicator to open positions, close positions or even reduce your position if the chart is at a critical point.Identifying overbought/oversold levelsAs you will see in the chart below, there are a variety of very useful indicators that could have generated some significant gains. The first overbought indicator shows the Fast Stochastic Oscillator figure reaching the 80% level and then turning sharply downwards through the three-period SMA. These crossover points are considered by many to be strong indicators that momentum is shifting and the short-term trend may be about to reverse.The second overbought position begins to emerge when the Fast Stochastic Oscillator and the SMA move above 80%. A move above 80% or below 20% should not necessarily be seen as a signal to sell or buy, but rather as an early warning that momentum may be about to change. https://preview.redd.it/3taqkc2kne0d1.png?width=1912&format=png&auto=webp&s=e7a55840fdae584d81ebe937210f3b3fe70ecb32 Many people prefer to wait for a sustained drop below 80% or move above 20% before reacting, thus eliminating a degree of volatility that can sometimes create false signals. This is where SMA lines can be very useful, smoother and less volatile, although you won't necessarily sell at the top due to the lag. You can also see the two false overbought signals where the Fast Stochastic Oscillator figure and the SMA fell below 80. However, they reversed quite quickly when the momentum picked up again and the chart moved back into higher territory. You will find that where there is a strong uptrend, which has not been broken, at some point there will be a pullback which can be an opportunity to buy into the weakness. This is the reason why the fast stochastic oscillator is more appropriate for day traders, or also for short-term traders. Bullish/bearish divergence There will be times when there is a bullish/bearish divergence between the actual chart and the stochastic oscillator indicator. As you can see with the chart below, the lowest point on the chart would indicate the possibility of a further decline. However, when you look at the stochastic oscillator indicator, the trend is moving in a different direction and is slightly bullish. This may be an indication that the stock has bottomed and momentum may be about to change. One of the main signals to watch out for with this particular chart is the fast stochastic oscillator moving through the SMA line. https://preview.redd.it/rku5zd2joe0d1.png?width=1087&format=png&auto=webp&s=e6583cea6a63f18ed49327c4f626a39608b9e016 You are equally likely to see a reversal where the main chart indicates an intact uptrend, while the stochastic oscillator shows a slowdown in momentum and a turn towards a downtrend. These are some of the rarest trading signals, but they are very interesting, especially when you incorporate simple trend lines into price charts. Price trendThe relationship between the Fast Stochastic Oscillator and the SMA is very important. As you can see in the chart below, the first section is dominated by the strong downtrend with the Fast Stochastic Oscillator and the SMA descending in parallel.Then there is a bounce on the chart followed by a move into choppy waters with an obvious downtrend. As you will see, both indicators remain below the 20% level, indicating that the momentum is relatively weak. That is until the Fast Stochastic Oscillator breaks the SMA line towards the end of the choppy price action area. https://preview.redd.it/v5d3gkatoe0d1.png?width=520&format=png&auto=webp&s=caa386e1e0e6979fc9210fe18c06c0e3acb9738b This change in momentum is demonstrated by the uptrend, although it is not difficult to see where the momentum begins to fade above 80%. When the short-term trend line breaks through the SMA and falls below the 80% level, this indicates another change in the trend – a possible sell signal. Advantages of using the stochastic oscillatorMomentum is very important when it comes to trading and there is no doubt that the stochastic oscillator indicator is a very useful tool. There are a number of advantages to consider which include: –Sensitive to impulse changeThe shorter the period during which the high, low and current price are compared, the more volatile the stochastic oscillator indicator will be. Using SMA trend lines can also create very strong buy/sell signals when the lines cross, especially above 80% and below 20%. This event would indicate that the short-term trend is changing and assuming it continues, a new trend will follow.Opportunity to identify bullish/bearish divergenceDue to the way the Stochastic Oscillator indicator is calculated, you will sometimes see a divergence between the price chart and the indicator. While the price chart may indicate that a downtrend is still intact, the stochastic oscillator chart may already be identifying a change in momentum before the price changes. As you will see in the chart above, these can be powerful trading signals. How long you can wait to see if a new trend emerges will vary between traders. How brave are you?The formula is flexibleThe shorter the period in question, the more volatile the stochastic oscillator indicator will be. However, there is the possibility of identifying short-term trading opportunities. However, for those who have a longer-term investment strategy, they can extend the number of periods in question. This will flatten the line of the Fast and Volatile Stochastic Oscillator and give a smoother line, which can make it easier to identify any changes in long-term trends.Risks and limitations of the indicatorAs with any technical indicator, the stochastic oscillator is not immune to false signals and is probably best used in conjunction with other trading indicators. Risks and limitations include:False signalsThe shorter the period over which the fast stochastic oscillator is calculated, the more susceptible it is to extreme volatility. This can create numerous false signals, although the impact can be reduced by adding a simple moving average line.Sideways TradingThe indicator works best when there is a new uptrend, a downtrend or perhaps a short, sharp period of consolidation before the trend re-emerges. During periods of sideways trading, this can create a relatively small gap between the high and low points, therefore creating sharp movements in the indicator on relatively small price movements.SMA lines delay trend changesUsing longer periods to calculate %K and SMA trend lines can make it easier to identify changes in the trend. However, due to the delay, you may miss a significant element of a changing trend before you decide to buy or sell. You can adjust the variables of the full stochastic oscillator indicator to help you with your specific investment strategy, lengthening or shortening the periods and adjusting the SMA.Stochastic Oscillator vs Other IndicatorsThe Stochastic Oscillator indicator is extremely flexible and you can adjust the periods and SMA variables to suit your trading plan. However, especially when looking at limited periods, there will be times when the indicator will create a false signal. Therefore, it is wise to consider other means of technical analysis to clarify whether a potential change in momentum indicated by the stochastic oscillator is also reflected elsewhere.Stochastic Oscillator vs RSIWhile it is true that you can use both the stochastic oscillator and the RSI (Relative Strength Index) to measure price momentum, they work on very different principles. The RSI measures potential overbought/oversold positions by comparing recent gains to recent losses. The idea behind the stochastic oscillator is based on the assumption that the current price should follow the current trend. When the current price moves against the trend, it can indicate a change in momentum and a possible buy/sell signal. So who wins the fight, the Stochastic Oscillator or the RSI?If the two oscillators indicated the same trend, this would be a powerful signal for investors. For example, if the price of an asset moved towards the upper end of its recent high/low range, it would indicate positive momentum. Assuming that the RSI oscillator is also showing a relatively strong trend, this would reduce the chances of a false signal. Stochastic Oscillator vs MACDThe Moving Average Convergence Divergence (MACD) is a prominent momentum indicator, although it is very different from the stochastic oscillator indicator. The MACD is calculated by subtracting the 26-period exponential moving average from the 12-period exponential moving average. Many traders use the MACD technical indicator in conjunction with the stochastic oscillator, often looking for crossover points between the two.Those who consider technical indicators from a distance might wonder why traders don't simply use three, four, five or more technical indicators together. The answer is simple: the time lag between different technical indicators can confuse the situation. By the time several different indicators have “aligned”, you may end up missing the vast majority of the trend. There is nothing wrong with using a single technical indicator, but there are risks and false signals can and do occur. BONKbot Telegram User Guide: Sniping 1000x Memecoins Unibot User Guide Top 7 Telegram Bots Access more profitable trading tips joining the Capitalist Exploits Insider Newsletter Get a $100 bonus trading with Binance |
2024.05.14 17:02 13Sanely How to Build Peasant Typal EDH
So, I have a long-standing interest in and identification with the peasant “class” of people irl. I appreciate the underdog, the every-person. I think that the peasant type in MTG does a great job of depicting the humanity of regular people, and I love that, so I want to make an EDH deck that tells a story about the peasant experience as people with limited resources, who have been historically exploited, and have had to act collectively to take back power. See this article about Wat Tyler’s 1381 peasant revolt for an interesting example:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peasants'_Revolt
I am not sure what commander and themes I want to use to tell this story. For reference, here are all of the 46 peasants in MTG currently.
https://scryfall.com/search?as=grid&order=name&q=type%3Apeasant+%28game%3Apaper%29+legal%3Acommander
They are centered in red and white with some black and green, and a couple blue.
I have thought about going with Mardu [[Caesar, Legion’s Emperor]] to hit on the theme of exploitation (there are also some death matters themes among peasants) but I would love other ideas about how to highlight this unique card type. What cards would you include outside of those with the peasant type to flesh out the deck? Maybe some aristocrats that also benefit from the exploitation of peasants? [[Cartel Aristocrat]] What do you think? Thanks!!
submitted by 13Sanely to EDH [link] [comments]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peasants'_Revolt
I am not sure what commander and themes I want to use to tell this story. For reference, here are all of the 46 peasants in MTG currently.
https://scryfall.com/search?as=grid&order=name&q=type%3Apeasant+%28game%3Apaper%29+legal%3Acommander
They are centered in red and white with some black and green, and a couple blue.
I have thought about going with Mardu [[Caesar, Legion’s Emperor]] to hit on the theme of exploitation (there are also some death matters themes among peasants) but I would love other ideas about how to highlight this unique card type. What cards would you include outside of those with the peasant type to flesh out the deck? Maybe some aristocrats that also benefit from the exploitation of peasants? [[Cartel Aristocrat]] What do you think? Thanks!!
2024.05.14 16:52 STEIN197 Whan can a libertarian society/country/state do against an external aggressor?
Hello! Can you please explain me, what a libertarian society can do against an external aggressor? I try to find an answer but can't find it and here is why (actually I can find but they are not the pretty ones).
I often hear that the conscription should be voluntary regardless whether it's a war time or a peace time. The problem arises when an aggressor (who is a dictatorship or a totalitarian state) invades the libertarian country. Let's suppose two states (the libertarian one and the aggressor) are +/- equal in population, area size, economics and so on.
What happens inside the libertarian state:
Before the war. If the conscription is voluntary, then there will be some amount of people that don't want to associate themselves with an army. There is also no any government propaganda about "patriotism" (or it's reduced as much as possible, allowing to make a counter-propaganda), which leads to even less people associated with the army.
In the ongoing war. Since everyone has the right to participate or not to participate in the war directly, there will be even less people who would like to fight, because "if I can avoid war and death, I will", then they can just flee the country or just don't participate in it. There will be only a few thousands volunteers who would want to fight against the aggressor. So there will be only one category of people in the war - those who want it.
What happens inside the aggressor state (I'm myself from one):
Before the war. If the conscription is not voluntary, then everyone will be associated with an army (with a few exceptions). Since the state is preparing for the war, there is also a strong government propaganda, years before the war, which leads to many brainwashed people who could believe that, which leads to the desire "I want to be in the army because I strongly believe in XYZ" -> more people that would want to be associated with the army (the desire, not the compulsion).
In the ongoing war. Since no one has the right to avoid the forced conscription, as much people as possible will be fighting in the army - "if I try to avoid the war, I will be punished 100%, then I will fight, may be I will get out safe and sound and earn some money and reputation". The borders could also be closed. There will be three categories of people in the war - those who want it, those who think that want it (i.e. brainwashed), those who don't want it but have no choice.
The result
The libertarian state will be just outnumbered by the aggressor, which could lead to the loss of the libertarian state which we try to build, since the aggressor could do anything to it
I see only two solutions:
What to do in such a case?
What to do if the agressor is greater in terms of population and war machine?
How to reduce chances of this happening?
Important note
For those who will say that in modern time the number of soldiers doesn't matter. I totally disagree with that, two easiest examples I could think of:
submitted by STEIN197 to Libertarian [link] [comments]
I often hear that the conscription should be voluntary regardless whether it's a war time or a peace time. The problem arises when an aggressor (who is a dictatorship or a totalitarian state) invades the libertarian country. Let's suppose two states (the libertarian one and the aggressor) are +/- equal in population, area size, economics and so on.
What happens inside the libertarian state:
Before the war. If the conscription is voluntary, then there will be some amount of people that don't want to associate themselves with an army. There is also no any government propaganda about "patriotism" (or it's reduced as much as possible, allowing to make a counter-propaganda), which leads to even less people associated with the army.
In the ongoing war. Since everyone has the right to participate or not to participate in the war directly, there will be even less people who would like to fight, because "if I can avoid war and death, I will", then they can just flee the country or just don't participate in it. There will be only a few thousands volunteers who would want to fight against the aggressor. So there will be only one category of people in the war - those who want it.
What happens inside the aggressor state (I'm myself from one):
Before the war. If the conscription is not voluntary, then everyone will be associated with an army (with a few exceptions). Since the state is preparing for the war, there is also a strong government propaganda, years before the war, which leads to many brainwashed people who could believe that, which leads to the desire "I want to be in the army because I strongly believe in XYZ" -> more people that would want to be associated with the army (the desire, not the compulsion).
In the ongoing war. Since no one has the right to avoid the forced conscription, as much people as possible will be fighting in the army - "if I try to avoid the war, I will be punished 100%, then I will fight, may be I will get out safe and sound and earn some money and reputation". The borders could also be closed. There will be three categories of people in the war - those who want it, those who think that want it (i.e. brainwashed), those who don't want it but have no choice.
The result
The libertarian state will be just outnumbered by the aggressor, which could lead to the loss of the libertarian state which we try to build, since the aggressor could do anything to it
I see only two solutions:
- The libertarian state could have a nuclear weapon to reduce the chances of invading. But what if the invasion happened, will the libertarian state use this weapon and if so, what's next?
- Use the forced conscription, to use make this happen, there also should be some sort of forced taxes, in such case the state is no more libertarian or at least two steps away from it
What to do in such a case?
What to do if the agressor is greater in terms of population and war machine?
How to reduce chances of this happening?
Important note
For those who will say that in modern time the number of soldiers doesn't matter. I totally disagree with that, two easiest examples I could think of:
- The losses of the WWII for the USSR were enermous not only because of the genocide, but because the state of USSR had no such an idea as "unacceptable losses". I've read a handful of books and articles (including the POV) and there are many evidences that the USSR just sent hundreds and thousands of almost naked soldiers on guns and tanks. One of the reason why Germany couldn't handle it
- The ongoing war in Ukraine. Again, Russia has an enermous potential to "win" the war by occupying and destroying more of the state AND Ukrainian society, since Russia just have much more people to kill
2024.05.14 16:48 Loud_Skirt_7421 What's my type?
I am new to this mbti and enneagram stuff, but I did look into cognitive functions a bit but I still am not sure which fit me, it might be because I am still pretty new. This is mostly a hobby for when I am bored and want to think, because I like to play with outside systems like this.
• How old are you? What's your gender? Give us a general description of yourself.
I am 16 years old, male , just your average quiet teenager that sucks at introspecting and wants to look cool to others yet does nothing to impress others (other than looks)
that sounded oddly specific.,.....
whatever
• Is there a medical diagnosis that may impact your mental stability somehow?
not really, not that I know of..
• Describe your upbringing. Did it have any kind of religious or structured influence? How did you respond to it?
I grew up in a poor family (duh), then just like your average adult couple they divorce, usually I'd stay a lot with my mother and she would teach me about morals which I now see some as stupid but either way I kind of "took" her morals and my dad's too. Kind of had to grew up early and take care of my smaller brother by substituting being a dad , and I have a lot of influence over my brother , and we would switch places a lot but the only comfort I had was in games, interacting with others on the games ,making fun of others and overall having a good time being accepted
• What do you do as a job or as a career (if you have one)? Do you like it? Why or why not?
At the moment I have no job, I do karate and I could teach others but I don't have the stuff necessary like: a place to train others, I am not at the highest level yet, customers and this is mostly the main things.
But I would really like to continue on this path of gym and karate since I already have an edge and kind of be under someone's wing to help me
• If you had to spend an entire weekend by yourself, how would you feel? Would you feel lonely or refreshed?
Mostly depends, on my mood sometimes I despise being alone and feel miserable being alone with my thoughts(and is mostly why I spend a lot of time on my computer despite not wanting to do so) or if the people in my circle kind of make me have a bad time then I would want to withdraw and get my energy back , usually I am very loud after I get comfortable with the other person and know what they are capable of
• What kinds of activities do you prefer? Do you like, and are you good at sports? Do you enjoy any other outdoor or indoor activities?
Like I said above I do Karate , I recently reached the brown belt ( YIPPPIE me) and me and the outdoors have a bad history but as of now I prefer to have a balance of both but mostly I would like to focus on real life things, especially when it comes to careers
• How curious are you? Do you have more ideas then you can execute? What are your curiosities about? What are your ideas about - is it environmental or conceptual, and can you please elaborate?
I am not too curious of stuff that is deep , it makes me feel miserable, but usually I get random questions sometimes and it makes me search , but not too deep into it just enough to have the idea cause I see no point in diving deeper. Usually when I even get these questions is from either talking out loud or just looking around me so it's mostly environmental (I think not too sure of this)
• Would you enjoy taking on a leadership position? Do you think you would be good at it? What would your leadership style be?
The only time I like leading is when I have knowledge and know I am the best to do it, if someone else is better then I'll let them do their thing but usually I wouldn't fully obey them I would kind of give some counter-arguments if there is room for some.
Even when I lead, others do listen to me and usually I am confident in doing it, kind of like that one quote of Sun Tzu:" Go to war only if you know you will win" , which my friend told me recently.
As for the style not too sure what it would really reference, but I would say I think of people as cogs in the machine
• Are you coordinated? Why do you feel as if you are or are not? Do you enjoy working with your hands in some form? Describe your activity?
Not too sure what to say on the "coordination" part but I for sure love working with my hands, especially when I cook for myself or others, and like I already mentioned I do karate so of course I like practicing with my hands improving my technique
• Are you artistic? If yes, describe your art? If you are not particular artistic but can appreciate art please likewise describe what forums of art you enjoy. Please explain your answer.
no I am not artistic at all , I don't really look into it at all since I don't consider it worthwhile but as a kid I did like drawing cause I was good at it and I got recognition for my drawings from other classmates and that would fuel me to make me like drawing cause the teacher liked it, others too and yeah.. Untill it kind of stopped receving the feedback and such
• What's your opinion about the past, present, and future? How do you deal with them?
I don't like to think of the past too much , especially when I think of myself, it's mostly negative things but I try to see the bright side of what I've achieved and such, because I wasn't healthy (even now I feel like I am not healthy but it's clearly better), I used to be chubby kind of fat , and before getting into karate I did handball where we trained physical condition and other things , and we had to do sit ups but due to me being fat I couldn't and others looked at me and started joking even the trainer and because of that I quit..
The present could be good but I am indifferent towards it I don't really work towards anything specific I like to remain a little reactive and eventually get help from others into shaping my future life.
And like I said I try to remain reactive of the present, I don't like planning too far ahead because it could be too early to plan and there might be more to do
• How do you act when others request your help to do something (anything)? If you would decide to help them, why would you do so?
I don't get asked for help frequently but it's either I help the person because I see they are struggling or they asked me and it goes two ways: 1. I agree and do the job or 2. I tell them "no" and go back to what I was doing (eventually feeling guilty I didn't help but I don't like being used for other's advantage)
• Do you need logical consistency in your life?
Yeah , it's pretty important people shouldn't only run on feelings but kind of fit some systems into some kind of framework, not really think about it 24/7, but make sense of it that is how I like to do it.
Even with this system of cognitive functions I try to understand it but sometimes it's a bit too abstract, I prefer more practical examples to fully understand the idea behind it
• How important is efficiency and productivity to you?
Not too much but not too less, usually I prefer it to not be feeling sad that I am "closed off somewhere" and not doing something, isolated from the world , especially with no computer atleast to go on the internet and joke around and chill with others(but of on a common task or else I will mind my business).
But I strive to be efficient in what I do over time , even if it's for a game that is pointless
• Do you control others, even if indirectly? How and why do you do that?
Simply no, I never was able to do this exactly , well maybe after I get to know the person a bit and see what they could do.... but I am not.
Also just read what controlling others mean , and I could see myself taking charge and just doing everything myself....
But I still feel like I don't, but I can see how I could, but I won't because I don't have the skill and it wouldn't be good
• What are your hobbies? Why do you like them?
Well probably just ,out of boredoom, playing games but not a wide variety which gets boring quick but familiarity bias is a thing.. and doing karate which energizes me almost everytime and anytime even if I don't feel like it and force myself. I just like when it goes well with others it and being liked by others, energizes me
• What is your learning style? What kind of learning environments do you struggle with most? Why do you like/struggle with these learning styles? Do you prefer classes involving memorization, logic, creativity, or your physical senses?
To be honest I didn't really pay attention to how I learn I just learn to get good grades in school and make it, yeah not too much here but I struggle with things that don't really add up to me or I don't see the logic behind
Usually I don't need explanations from the teacher I kind of tend to see the logic behind everything mostly without asking much information since some subjects have systems that are easily to juggle with(like math but I sometimes struggle with calculating in my head)
• How good are you at strategizing? Do you easily break up projects into manageable tasks? Or do you have a tendency to wing projects and improvise as you go?
I try to simplify strategizing, yes having a plan in depth is good but people for sure won't like if you are gonna stick to one rigid plan , which is why you have to make it kind of like a team thing even if I do make a rigid plan I try to make it sound simple and to the point based of data that others and I know, even making decision off the data my group knows
• What are your aspirations in life, professionally and personally?
Probably to feel happy I achieved something and doing something in the outside world, eventually influencing others
• What are your fears? What makes you uncomfortable? What do you hate? Why?
Mostly personal stuff , and emotional situations, my emotional inteligence is bad and I am bad at emotions too, atleast handling the emotions of others, but sometimes I try to let them vent to me and help them a bit and try to be empathetic even tho I don't show it too much, mostly I show it through acting tho
• What do the "highs" in your life look like?
Positive outlook on life, relationships are well but I don't worry about them too much unless there is an obvious problem and really liking to hang around others, and especially having something going on for myself
• What do the "lows" in your life look like?
the first thing that comes to my mind is: withrdawn, melancholy and just starting to critique everyone in my head but not really telling them, yeah sometimes I may start bluntly joking about other's and stuff and even situtations, I try to poke fun and when it kind of fails I feel like withdrawing from others since it doesn't work Melancholy litteraly makes me feel miserable about everything, mostly makes me feel depressed. I do tend to feel it often but I try to supress it trough doing things, like playing on the computer , youtube and such (everyone does this to some extent)
• How attached are you to reality? Do you daydream often, or do you pay attention to what's around you? If you do daydream, are you aware of your surroundings while you do so?
I find myself daydreaming when bored and not really anything is going on but I do tend to be mindful of what others do in case they try to harm me...
But even if I daydream it's mostly about what everything could have been, kind of like what I could have done or what I could do and how it would end up/ ended up, but it does happen quite a lot
• Imagine you are alone in a blank, empty room. There is nothing for you to do and no one to talk to. What do you think about?
Not too sure if I would ever get there but thinking out loud here so , probably about some random stuff in my head unrelated to my situations untill one thought hits close to home and I go into some deeper stuff , and usually when I get deeper into things I tend to feel miserable, my friend (who is INTJ btw) said that my negative depressing thoughts that I hate match the thinking of the philosophy of "Nihilism" which is kind of true....
• How long do you take to make an important decision? And do you change your mind once you've made it?
I try and not stay too long on it but sometimes I might run back and forth if I am not too sure, but I try to stay decisive , because being indecisive a lot is bad..
• How long do you take to process your emotions? How important are emotions in your life?
I kind of look down on emotions , yes I feel them but I just tend to ignore and repress them sometimes, but I vent to closer friends from time to time, but this is mostly because my parents would misinterpret my emotions...
My mom would just over moralify everything and bring it to a stupid extreme which is unrelated..
and My dad would just make fun of them , but sometimes he would give me spot on answers which are exactly what I need
• Do you ever catch yourself agreeing with others just to appease them and keep the conversation going? How often? Why?
Not really , even if I do it's in a way to shut off the conversation, because I don't like having conversation with no point
• Do you break rules often? Do you think authority should be challenged, or that they know better? If you do break rules, why?
I don't really mind rules , but I don't pay attention to them too much(because no need to worry if you don't go out of your way to try something that could count as "breaking the rules") mostly to the general ones which could punish you very harshly but overtime they could be exploited and I do that when I am confident I won't be caught or it won't punish me
I also took the mbti test from Michael Caloz site (I saw people doing this one a lot so I figured I might give it a try for this post :D)
statistics of functions
the top result (followed by ESTP and then ESTJ, in that order)
I saw other posts also mentioning this, and I figured I would too
I took this test a bit rushed cause I needed to do something..
submitted by Loud_Skirt_7421 to MbtiTypeMe [link] [comments]
• How old are you? What's your gender? Give us a general description of yourself.
I am 16 years old, male , just your average quiet teenager that sucks at introspecting and wants to look cool to others yet does nothing to impress others (other than looks)
that sounded oddly specific.,.....
whatever
• Is there a medical diagnosis that may impact your mental stability somehow?
not really, not that I know of..
• Describe your upbringing. Did it have any kind of religious or structured influence? How did you respond to it?
I grew up in a poor family (duh), then just like your average adult couple they divorce, usually I'd stay a lot with my mother and she would teach me about morals which I now see some as stupid but either way I kind of "took" her morals and my dad's too. Kind of had to grew up early and take care of my smaller brother by substituting being a dad , and I have a lot of influence over my brother , and we would switch places a lot but the only comfort I had was in games, interacting with others on the games ,making fun of others and overall having a good time being accepted
• What do you do as a job or as a career (if you have one)? Do you like it? Why or why not?
At the moment I have no job, I do karate and I could teach others but I don't have the stuff necessary like: a place to train others, I am not at the highest level yet, customers and this is mostly the main things.
But I would really like to continue on this path of gym and karate since I already have an edge and kind of be under someone's wing to help me
• If you had to spend an entire weekend by yourself, how would you feel? Would you feel lonely or refreshed?
Mostly depends, on my mood sometimes I despise being alone and feel miserable being alone with my thoughts(and is mostly why I spend a lot of time on my computer despite not wanting to do so) or if the people in my circle kind of make me have a bad time then I would want to withdraw and get my energy back , usually I am very loud after I get comfortable with the other person and know what they are capable of
• What kinds of activities do you prefer? Do you like, and are you good at sports? Do you enjoy any other outdoor or indoor activities?
Like I said above I do Karate , I recently reached the brown belt ( YIPPPIE me) and me and the outdoors have a bad history but as of now I prefer to have a balance of both but mostly I would like to focus on real life things, especially when it comes to careers
• How curious are you? Do you have more ideas then you can execute? What are your curiosities about? What are your ideas about - is it environmental or conceptual, and can you please elaborate?
I am not too curious of stuff that is deep , it makes me feel miserable, but usually I get random questions sometimes and it makes me search , but not too deep into it just enough to have the idea cause I see no point in diving deeper. Usually when I even get these questions is from either talking out loud or just looking around me so it's mostly environmental (I think not too sure of this)
• Would you enjoy taking on a leadership position? Do you think you would be good at it? What would your leadership style be?
The only time I like leading is when I have knowledge and know I am the best to do it, if someone else is better then I'll let them do their thing but usually I wouldn't fully obey them I would kind of give some counter-arguments if there is room for some.
Even when I lead, others do listen to me and usually I am confident in doing it, kind of like that one quote of Sun Tzu:" Go to war only if you know you will win" , which my friend told me recently.
As for the style not too sure what it would really reference, but I would say I think of people as cogs in the machine
• Are you coordinated? Why do you feel as if you are or are not? Do you enjoy working with your hands in some form? Describe your activity?
Not too sure what to say on the "coordination" part but I for sure love working with my hands, especially when I cook for myself or others, and like I already mentioned I do karate so of course I like practicing with my hands improving my technique
• Are you artistic? If yes, describe your art? If you are not particular artistic but can appreciate art please likewise describe what forums of art you enjoy. Please explain your answer.
no I am not artistic at all , I don't really look into it at all since I don't consider it worthwhile but as a kid I did like drawing cause I was good at it and I got recognition for my drawings from other classmates and that would fuel me to make me like drawing cause the teacher liked it, others too and yeah.. Untill it kind of stopped receving the feedback and such
• What's your opinion about the past, present, and future? How do you deal with them?
I don't like to think of the past too much , especially when I think of myself, it's mostly negative things but I try to see the bright side of what I've achieved and such, because I wasn't healthy (even now I feel like I am not healthy but it's clearly better), I used to be chubby kind of fat , and before getting into karate I did handball where we trained physical condition and other things , and we had to do sit ups but due to me being fat I couldn't and others looked at me and started joking even the trainer and because of that I quit..
The present could be good but I am indifferent towards it I don't really work towards anything specific I like to remain a little reactive and eventually get help from others into shaping my future life.
And like I said I try to remain reactive of the present, I don't like planning too far ahead because it could be too early to plan and there might be more to do
• How do you act when others request your help to do something (anything)? If you would decide to help them, why would you do so?
I don't get asked for help frequently but it's either I help the person because I see they are struggling or they asked me and it goes two ways: 1. I agree and do the job or 2. I tell them "no" and go back to what I was doing (eventually feeling guilty I didn't help but I don't like being used for other's advantage)
• Do you need logical consistency in your life?
Yeah , it's pretty important people shouldn't only run on feelings but kind of fit some systems into some kind of framework, not really think about it 24/7, but make sense of it that is how I like to do it.
Even with this system of cognitive functions I try to understand it but sometimes it's a bit too abstract, I prefer more practical examples to fully understand the idea behind it
• How important is efficiency and productivity to you?
Not too much but not too less, usually I prefer it to not be feeling sad that I am "closed off somewhere" and not doing something, isolated from the world , especially with no computer atleast to go on the internet and joke around and chill with others(but of on a common task or else I will mind my business).
But I strive to be efficient in what I do over time , even if it's for a game that is pointless
• Do you control others, even if indirectly? How and why do you do that?
Simply no, I never was able to do this exactly , well maybe after I get to know the person a bit and see what they could do.... but I am not.
Also just read what controlling others mean , and I could see myself taking charge and just doing everything myself....
But I still feel like I don't, but I can see how I could, but I won't because I don't have the skill and it wouldn't be good
• What are your hobbies? Why do you like them?
Well probably just ,out of boredoom, playing games but not a wide variety which gets boring quick but familiarity bias is a thing.. and doing karate which energizes me almost everytime and anytime even if I don't feel like it and force myself. I just like when it goes well with others it and being liked by others, energizes me
• What is your learning style? What kind of learning environments do you struggle with most? Why do you like/struggle with these learning styles? Do you prefer classes involving memorization, logic, creativity, or your physical senses?
To be honest I didn't really pay attention to how I learn I just learn to get good grades in school and make it, yeah not too much here but I struggle with things that don't really add up to me or I don't see the logic behind
Usually I don't need explanations from the teacher I kind of tend to see the logic behind everything mostly without asking much information since some subjects have systems that are easily to juggle with(like math but I sometimes struggle with calculating in my head)
• How good are you at strategizing? Do you easily break up projects into manageable tasks? Or do you have a tendency to wing projects and improvise as you go?
I try to simplify strategizing, yes having a plan in depth is good but people for sure won't like if you are gonna stick to one rigid plan , which is why you have to make it kind of like a team thing even if I do make a rigid plan I try to make it sound simple and to the point based of data that others and I know, even making decision off the data my group knows
• What are your aspirations in life, professionally and personally?
Probably to feel happy I achieved something and doing something in the outside world, eventually influencing others
• What are your fears? What makes you uncomfortable? What do you hate? Why?
Mostly personal stuff , and emotional situations, my emotional inteligence is bad and I am bad at emotions too, atleast handling the emotions of others, but sometimes I try to let them vent to me and help them a bit and try to be empathetic even tho I don't show it too much, mostly I show it through acting tho
• What do the "highs" in your life look like?
Positive outlook on life, relationships are well but I don't worry about them too much unless there is an obvious problem and really liking to hang around others, and especially having something going on for myself
• What do the "lows" in your life look like?
the first thing that comes to my mind is: withrdawn, melancholy and just starting to critique everyone in my head but not really telling them, yeah sometimes I may start bluntly joking about other's and stuff and even situtations, I try to poke fun and when it kind of fails I feel like withdrawing from others since it doesn't work Melancholy litteraly makes me feel miserable about everything, mostly makes me feel depressed. I do tend to feel it often but I try to supress it trough doing things, like playing on the computer , youtube and such (everyone does this to some extent)
• How attached are you to reality? Do you daydream often, or do you pay attention to what's around you? If you do daydream, are you aware of your surroundings while you do so?
I find myself daydreaming when bored and not really anything is going on but I do tend to be mindful of what others do in case they try to harm me...
But even if I daydream it's mostly about what everything could have been, kind of like what I could have done or what I could do and how it would end up/ ended up, but it does happen quite a lot
• Imagine you are alone in a blank, empty room. There is nothing for you to do and no one to talk to. What do you think about?
Not too sure if I would ever get there but thinking out loud here so , probably about some random stuff in my head unrelated to my situations untill one thought hits close to home and I go into some deeper stuff , and usually when I get deeper into things I tend to feel miserable, my friend (who is INTJ btw) said that my negative depressing thoughts that I hate match the thinking of the philosophy of "Nihilism" which is kind of true....
• How long do you take to make an important decision? And do you change your mind once you've made it?
I try and not stay too long on it but sometimes I might run back and forth if I am not too sure, but I try to stay decisive , because being indecisive a lot is bad..
• How long do you take to process your emotions? How important are emotions in your life?
I kind of look down on emotions , yes I feel them but I just tend to ignore and repress them sometimes, but I vent to closer friends from time to time, but this is mostly because my parents would misinterpret my emotions...
My mom would just over moralify everything and bring it to a stupid extreme which is unrelated..
and My dad would just make fun of them , but sometimes he would give me spot on answers which are exactly what I need
• Do you ever catch yourself agreeing with others just to appease them and keep the conversation going? How often? Why?
Not really , even if I do it's in a way to shut off the conversation, because I don't like having conversation with no point
• Do you break rules often? Do you think authority should be challenged, or that they know better? If you do break rules, why?
I don't really mind rules , but I don't pay attention to them too much(because no need to worry if you don't go out of your way to try something that could count as "breaking the rules") mostly to the general ones which could punish you very harshly but overtime they could be exploited and I do that when I am confident I won't be caught or it won't punish me
I also took the mbti test from Michael Caloz site (I saw people doing this one a lot so I figured I might give it a try for this post :D)
statistics of functions
the top result (followed by ESTP and then ESTJ, in that order)
I saw other posts also mentioning this, and I figured I would too
I took this test a bit rushed cause I needed to do something..
2024.05.14 16:36 TheBlaringBlue The Art of the Rap Battle
Eivor is a bit of a strange protagonist.
She’s basically flawless and without blame. She’s brash and bold, proud and unashamed — brave and wise far beyond her years, yet able to be soft and compassionate when not brandishing spears. She’s got a knack for leadership, a strong moral compass and an even stronger muscular system with which to enact justice.
And she’s got bars?
As someone not deeply versed in medieval European histories, imagine my shock and confusion upon discovering that Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla included rap battling.
My first experience with Flyting had me asking so many questions about what I just witnessed that I couldn’t wait to begin Googling. I figured flyting probably was historically accurate, but if that’s the case, then what else can it tells us about the medieval warrior and about Eivor’s characterization?
I set off to find out.
--
Wikipedia and howstuffworks combined gave me a robust definition of flyting.
A ritual, poetic exchange of insults practiced mainly between the 5th and 16th centuries. Examples of flyting are found throughout Scots, Ancient, Medieval and Modern Celtic, Old English, Middle English and Norse literature involving both historical and mythological figures. The exchanges would become extremely provocative, often involving accusations of cowardice or sexual perversion.
The idea behind flyting was to influence public opinion of the participants and raise both of their profiles. And each participant wanted to make himself look better than the other, even if they were friendly.
Not only that, but flyting’s also the first recorded use of shit as an insult. That right there is worth this whole essay and then some.
--
I came away from those definitions with some small Euphoria, as they reinforce what I already expected from Ubisoft — historically accurate and (arguably) immersive side activities grounded in realism.
Unfortunately, none of the flyting foes that Eivor faces in this fantasy are founded in any real-world flyters. I was particularly frustrated when I realized Fergal the Faceless and Borghild the Alewife’s Bane were fictional features, not real historical fiends of rhythm and rhyme.
Two of Eivor’s syntax competitors are “real” in some sense, however.
In Norse mythos, Odin, Thor, Loki, Freyja and more would handle their Family Matters over a flyte from time to time, dueling wits and words as competition and entertainment.
In fact, one flyte we do see in game — Odin as he flytes over the river with Thor in the Asgard Arc — is likely a reference to a real medieval Norse poem; The Hárbarðsljóð.
In it, Thor jaunts back to Asgard after a journey in Jötunheim. He comes to a junction in which he must jump a large river, and thus hunts down a ferryman to shepherd him across. The ferryman, Hárbarðr, is Odin in disguise. He then begins to diss guys.
Ahem. ‘Guys’ being Thor, obviously.
First, Odin drops a yo-mama joke:
Ratatosk is the only other ‘real’ flyting enemy in Valhalla. While Odin doesn’t flyte with Ratatosk in Norse myth to my knowledge, the flyting against the squirrel is thematically accurate, at least.
Ratatosk’s purpose is to scramble up and down Yggdrasil, scurrying spoken messages from the eagle that sits at its peaks to the snake that slithers at its base. The nature of Ratatosk’s messages is in line with the act of flyting — the mischievous rodent carries falsehoods and aggressive statements to stir up drama and distrust between bird and serpent.
Flyting took place not only in poems and folklore, but in town squares and royal court. It was a facet of medieval life and social interaction. This weaving of prose then, in this time period, seemingly was just about as much of an admired skill as the swinging of a sword. It’s no wonder our unbreakable warrior Eivor is so proficient with word.
--
Like, really proficient with word.
I mean, I know it’s me choosing the dialogue options, but sheesh, is there anything she can’t do?
Actually, Eivor’s expertise in flyting is strange to me. It feels random and unearned — out of character, even. It comes more unexpectedly than Kendrick Lamar’s Not Like Us.
It probably only feels out of character, however, due to our modern understanding of proficiency with words versus proficiency with might. Our current interpretation of verbal ability compared to physical ability would perceive verbal ability as the ‘softer’ of the two skillsets. Physical strength is typically interpreted as tough and more dominant. You don’t expect to see an MMA fighter composing poetry, do you? The qualities that modern thought attributes to writing and physicality don’t mesh.
But in reality — and historically accurately in Valhalla — medieval warriors weren’t just blind berserkers. They were actually artists, poets and writers.
We’ve already demonstrated how Odin and Thor — Norse myth’s most famous warriors — carried out flyting. Thus, medieval Vikings would’ve surely done the same. Beyond Vikings though, the Illiad contains instances of public, ritualized abuse. Taunting songs are present in Inuit culture while Arabic poetry contains a form of flyting called naqa’id. Further, Japanese Samurai were known to be frequent composers of haiku, while Japanese culture also gave birth to Haikai, poetry in which vulgar satire and puns were wielded.
This historical accuracy ends up eliminating the randomness of Eivor’s flyting ability. Despite her verbal finesse feeling unearned, we can surmise historically that Eivor has practiced the wielding of words plenty in her life before we take over as the player. She’s dedicated time to this.
Now that we know why she has it, we can take a closer look at what it does for her.
--
So, Eivor can rap. She can match you with her axe or she can match you with her words. She’s just about unbeatable.
Her mastery of words demonstrates on some level that she’s not all Push Ups and might is right. She’s not all bruiser and bluster, burn and berserk. She’s an appreciator of the finer things — the more abstract, mental skills that require brain power, deftness and finesse.
This duality of strength and genius rounds out Eivor into a deeper, richer, more admirable character. More than just raw muscle in pursuit of glory, Eivor’s mastery of verse demonstrates her prioritizing not just her body, but her mind.
And it goes a long way for her.
Eivor can use her prowess with prose to progress past pointless plot points throughout Valhalla’s plethora of arcs and missions. It’s just a stat check in the end, but with enough practice flyting and enough charisma gained, Eivor unlocks new dialogue options that bend the world around her to her will.
Witch hunters in Eurvicscire on the brink of terrorizing Moira can be dispersed verbally rather than brawled or killed. There’s an entire riddle-solving fetch quest in Wincestre that can be skipped completely by telling King Aelfred’s abbot fuck off (figuratively). Eivor’s sharpening of her mind protects her body, saves her time, and allows her to frictionlessly fell her endeavors.
Her articulate advances don’t just alter her into admirability, they allow her to influence people and progression. With semantics from her mouth and twists from her tongue, Eivor can have her way whenever she wishes. In a game this large, I’m only left longing that the opportunity to make use of this charisma wasn’t relegated to niches.
Regardless, if medieval England is butter, Eivor’s tongue is the hot knife that behooves her move through her subduing more smoothly.
It all just goes to show that ̶m̶i̶g̶h̶t̶ flyte is right.
submitted by TheBlaringBlue to AssassinsCreedValhala [link] [comments]
She’s basically flawless and without blame. She’s brash and bold, proud and unashamed — brave and wise far beyond her years, yet able to be soft and compassionate when not brandishing spears. She’s got a knack for leadership, a strong moral compass and an even stronger muscular system with which to enact justice.
And she’s got bars?
As someone not deeply versed in medieval European histories, imagine my shock and confusion upon discovering that Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla included rap battling.
My first experience with Flyting had me asking so many questions about what I just witnessed that I couldn’t wait to begin Googling. I figured flyting probably was historically accurate, but if that’s the case, then what else can it tells us about the medieval warrior and about Eivor’s characterization?
I set off to find out.
--
Wikipedia and howstuffworks combined gave me a robust definition of flyting.
A ritual, poetic exchange of insults practiced mainly between the 5th and 16th centuries. Examples of flyting are found throughout Scots, Ancient, Medieval and Modern Celtic, Old English, Middle English and Norse literature involving both historical and mythological figures. The exchanges would become extremely provocative, often involving accusations of cowardice or sexual perversion.
The idea behind flyting was to influence public opinion of the participants and raise both of their profiles. And each participant wanted to make himself look better than the other, even if they were friendly.
Not only that, but flyting’s also the first recorded use of shit as an insult. That right there is worth this whole essay and then some.
--
I came away from those definitions with some small Euphoria, as they reinforce what I already expected from Ubisoft — historically accurate and (arguably) immersive side activities grounded in realism.
Unfortunately, none of the flyting foes that Eivor faces in this fantasy are founded in any real-world flyters. I was particularly frustrated when I realized Fergal the Faceless and Borghild the Alewife’s Bane were fictional features, not real historical fiends of rhythm and rhyme.
Two of Eivor’s syntax competitors are “real” in some sense, however.
In Norse mythos, Odin, Thor, Loki, Freyja and more would handle their Family Matters over a flyte from time to time, dueling wits and words as competition and entertainment.
In fact, one flyte we do see in game — Odin as he flytes over the river with Thor in the Asgard Arc — is likely a reference to a real medieval Norse poem; The Hárbarðsljóð.
In it, Thor jaunts back to Asgard after a journey in Jötunheim. He comes to a junction in which he must jump a large river, and thus hunts down a ferryman to shepherd him across. The ferryman, Hárbarðr, is Odin in disguise. He then begins to diss guys.
Ahem. ‘Guys’ being Thor, obviously.
First, Odin drops a yo-mama joke:
Of thy morning feats art thou proud, but the future thou knowest not wholly; Doleful thine home-coming is: thy mother, me thinks, is dead.He keeps going, taking more shots than a First Person Shooter, this time saying Thor dresses like a girl:
Three good dwellings methinks, thou hast not; Barefoot thou standest and wearest a beggar’s dress; Not even hose dost thou have.Thor says watch your mouth before I clap back:
Ill for thee comes thy keenness of tongue, if the water I choose to wade; Louder, I ween, than a wolf thou cryest, if a blow of my hammer thou hast.Odin replies by saying Thor’s wife is fucking another dude:
Sif has a lover at home, and him shouldst thou meet; More fitting it were on him to put forth thy strength.The version we play out in game isn’t identical to the real-world poem, but carries some similarities; Thor’s threatening to cross the river to fight Odin as well as his boasting of slaying giants are present in each.
Ratatosk is the only other ‘real’ flyting enemy in Valhalla. While Odin doesn’t flyte with Ratatosk in Norse myth to my knowledge, the flyting against the squirrel is thematically accurate, at least.
Ratatosk’s purpose is to scramble up and down Yggdrasil, scurrying spoken messages from the eagle that sits at its peaks to the snake that slithers at its base. The nature of Ratatosk’s messages is in line with the act of flyting — the mischievous rodent carries falsehoods and aggressive statements to stir up drama and distrust between bird and serpent.
Flyting took place not only in poems and folklore, but in town squares and royal court. It was a facet of medieval life and social interaction. This weaving of prose then, in this time period, seemingly was just about as much of an admired skill as the swinging of a sword. It’s no wonder our unbreakable warrior Eivor is so proficient with word.
--
Like, really proficient with word.
I mean, I know it’s me choosing the dialogue options, but sheesh, is there anything she can’t do?
Actually, Eivor’s expertise in flyting is strange to me. It feels random and unearned — out of character, even. It comes more unexpectedly than Kendrick Lamar’s Not Like Us.
It probably only feels out of character, however, due to our modern understanding of proficiency with words versus proficiency with might. Our current interpretation of verbal ability compared to physical ability would perceive verbal ability as the ‘softer’ of the two skillsets. Physical strength is typically interpreted as tough and more dominant. You don’t expect to see an MMA fighter composing poetry, do you? The qualities that modern thought attributes to writing and physicality don’t mesh.
But in reality — and historically accurately in Valhalla — medieval warriors weren’t just blind berserkers. They were actually artists, poets and writers.
We’ve already demonstrated how Odin and Thor — Norse myth’s most famous warriors — carried out flyting. Thus, medieval Vikings would’ve surely done the same. Beyond Vikings though, the Illiad contains instances of public, ritualized abuse. Taunting songs are present in Inuit culture while Arabic poetry contains a form of flyting called naqa’id. Further, Japanese Samurai were known to be frequent composers of haiku, while Japanese culture also gave birth to Haikai, poetry in which vulgar satire and puns were wielded.
This historical accuracy ends up eliminating the randomness of Eivor’s flyting ability. Despite her verbal finesse feeling unearned, we can surmise historically that Eivor has practiced the wielding of words plenty in her life before we take over as the player. She’s dedicated time to this.
Now that we know why she has it, we can take a closer look at what it does for her.
--
So, Eivor can rap. She can match you with her axe or she can match you with her words. She’s just about unbeatable.
Her mastery of words demonstrates on some level that she’s not all Push Ups and might is right. She’s not all bruiser and bluster, burn and berserk. She’s an appreciator of the finer things — the more abstract, mental skills that require brain power, deftness and finesse.
This duality of strength and genius rounds out Eivor into a deeper, richer, more admirable character. More than just raw muscle in pursuit of glory, Eivor’s mastery of verse demonstrates her prioritizing not just her body, but her mind.
And it goes a long way for her.
Eivor can use her prowess with prose to progress past pointless plot points throughout Valhalla’s plethora of arcs and missions. It’s just a stat check in the end, but with enough practice flyting and enough charisma gained, Eivor unlocks new dialogue options that bend the world around her to her will.
Witch hunters in Eurvicscire on the brink of terrorizing Moira can be dispersed verbally rather than brawled or killed. There’s an entire riddle-solving fetch quest in Wincestre that can be skipped completely by telling King Aelfred’s abbot fuck off (figuratively). Eivor’s sharpening of her mind protects her body, saves her time, and allows her to frictionlessly fell her endeavors.
Her articulate advances don’t just alter her into admirability, they allow her to influence people and progression. With semantics from her mouth and twists from her tongue, Eivor can have her way whenever she wishes. In a game this large, I’m only left longing that the opportunity to make use of this charisma wasn’t relegated to niches.
Regardless, if medieval England is butter, Eivor’s tongue is the hot knife that behooves her move through her subduing more smoothly.
It all just goes to show that ̶m̶i̶g̶h̶t̶ flyte is right.
2024.05.14 16:32 Listen2Wolff Free Market? Competition? Remember -YOU- pay the tariff bill not the importer
Biden announces 100% tariff on Chinese-made electric vehicles
Another example of how the US government protects the Plutocracy to your detriment.
Yes, there will be a lot of job losses in the US automotive industry. If they had been investing in infrastructure, they would have the technology to build these Chinese cars. But the American Plutocracy is only worried about how to squeeze every last cent out of your labor.
The US Plutocracy are the ones:
submitted by Listen2Wolff to economy [link] [comments]
Another example of how the US government protects the Plutocracy to your detriment.
Yes, there will be a lot of job losses in the US automotive industry. If they had been investing in infrastructure, they would have the technology to build these Chinese cars. But the American Plutocracy is only worried about how to squeeze every last cent out of your labor.
The US Plutocracy are the ones:
- who pushed for the Ukraine War
- finance the NED to promote color revolutions around the world
- established Israel to manufacture conflict throughout the Middle East so they could "steal the oil"
- promote wars so they can siphon the wealth you create into the MIC (they don't care if they lose)
- have placed the world on the brink of Nuclear war.
- have trained US police forces in Israel to terrorize American Citizens so they "keep quiet"
2024.05.14 16:28 David_Lo_Pan007 China’s Economy Is Nearing Its End, With Only 2 to 3 Years Left. A Massive Collapse Might Occur Soon
 | Not long ago, veteran Chinese media figure Hu Wenhui introduced a new concept in an article -- "a historical garbage period." What does it mean? Hu Wenhui said, "History is like a competition, there are inevitably many garbage times. When the general trend is set and the defeat is irreversible, no matter how hard you try, it is just a futile struggle, and you can only try to end it as gracefully as possible." He cited the end of several Chinese dynasties as examples of historical garbage times. In these periods, no one could reverse the demise of the dynasty, no matter how they tried. submitted by David_Lo_Pan007 to Wing_Kong_Exchange [link] [comments] |
2024.05.14 16:23 Select_Revenue9698 A complete BIOLOGICAL SEX CHANGE
How many of you would want and wish to completely change and align your genetic sex with your psychological sex… as in changing your chromosomes for example? If it was a possibility?
Edit: Sense there’s dense people trolling under the post and not understanding the question… I am NOT asking if you would (in a dreamworld) want to wake up as your true sex. I’m asking if there was a way in let’s say 10-20+ years time to change your genetic sex - through gene therapy… would you go through with it? Would that be important to you?
https://prizedwriting.ucdavis.edu/sites/prizedwriting.ucdavis.edu/files/sitewide/pastissues/12–13%20LAWRY.pdf
submitted by Select_Revenue9698 to truscum [link] [comments]
Edit: Sense there’s dense people trolling under the post and not understanding the question… I am NOT asking if you would (in a dreamworld) want to wake up as your true sex. I’m asking if there was a way in let’s say 10-20+ years time to change your genetic sex - through gene therapy… would you go through with it? Would that be important to you?
https://prizedwriting.ucdavis.edu/sites/prizedwriting.ucdavis.edu/files/sitewide/pastissues/12–13%20LAWRY.pdf
2024.05.14 16:22 Agreeable-Muffin-778 My sibling is psychologically abusing my parents and I don’t know how to help them.
I believe My (30F) younger sibling (27) is psychologically abusing our parents (67m and 52F). Younger sibling lives with them, but does not contribute to the home in any way. YS will regularly throw tantrums like a child, yelling/screaming, breaking things, accuse them of being unsupportive, etc over small things such as being asked to take out the garbage on time or clean up after themselves. YS has a job, but only works 1-2 days a week and does not use any of this money to financially contribute. They spend what money they have on weed and spend their days smoking, sleeping and playing video games. YS regularly steals money and other items from my parents despite the fact they provide food and utilities as well as a rent free home. All around they’re a deadbeat and an ass.
Here is where things really cross into abuse territory… we have an older sibling who had major behavioral issues and was kicked out of the house at 18. After being on his own for a few years, he came back and started working on bettering his life when he was struck by a drunk driver and is now living with serious mental and physical impairment. This was over 10 years ago, but becuase of this experience, my parents (mom especially) are unwilling to ever put one of their kids out again or really address behavioral concerns. YS knows this and has been manipulating that fact ever since. YS talks to my parents like they are stupid, they starts arguments and throw full on tantrums over nothing and will regularly threaten suicide to get his way. This also happens every time someone else is getting attention. For example, yesterday was Mother’s Day and he made a big deal of crying and screaming becuase my kids were being too loud and my dad was watching tv. Mom told YS that if they don’t like the activity on the house, they need to find their own place. YS then disappeared for hours without responding to anyone’s texts or calls only to return in the middle of the night. They left a dr. Summary on the counter for my parents to find in the morning stating they were contemplating suicide. This is really just scratching the surface of the shit YS does to people and it would take all day to lay it all out there.
I have tried to explain to my parents that this is abuse and they need to find a way out of this situation, but becuase of past trauma, they feel very limited on what to do. They are even considering paying part of YS monthly rent somewhere just to get them out of their house. How do I help my parents?
submitted by Agreeable-Muffin-778 to LifeAdvice [link] [comments]
Here is where things really cross into abuse territory… we have an older sibling who had major behavioral issues and was kicked out of the house at 18. After being on his own for a few years, he came back and started working on bettering his life when he was struck by a drunk driver and is now living with serious mental and physical impairment. This was over 10 years ago, but becuase of this experience, my parents (mom especially) are unwilling to ever put one of their kids out again or really address behavioral concerns. YS knows this and has been manipulating that fact ever since. YS talks to my parents like they are stupid, they starts arguments and throw full on tantrums over nothing and will regularly threaten suicide to get his way. This also happens every time someone else is getting attention. For example, yesterday was Mother’s Day and he made a big deal of crying and screaming becuase my kids were being too loud and my dad was watching tv. Mom told YS that if they don’t like the activity on the house, they need to find their own place. YS then disappeared for hours without responding to anyone’s texts or calls only to return in the middle of the night. They left a dr. Summary on the counter for my parents to find in the morning stating they were contemplating suicide. This is really just scratching the surface of the shit YS does to people and it would take all day to lay it all out there.
I have tried to explain to my parents that this is abuse and they need to find a way out of this situation, but becuase of past trauma, they feel very limited on what to do. They are even considering paying part of YS monthly rent somewhere just to get them out of their house. How do I help my parents?
2024.05.14 16:20 PetrZitskiy Navigating Online Casino Bonuses and Offers
 | [ Navigating Online Casino Bonuses and Offers ] submitted by PetrZitskiy to BestCryptoCasinosUS [link] [comments] Online casinos have revolutionized the gambling industry by offering a plethora of bonuses and promotional offers designed to attract and retain players. For both new and experienced gamblers, understanding how to navigate these bonuses can significantly enhance the online casino experience. This article delves into the various types of online casino bonuses, how to maximize their benefits, and what to watch out for to make the most of your gaming adventure. Types of Online Casino Bonuses
Maximizing the Benefits of Casino Bonuses
Pitfalls to Avoid
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Navigating online casino bonuses and offers requires a strategic approach and a keen understanding of the terms and conditions. By carefully selecting bonuses, managing wagering requirements, and being aware of potential pitfalls, players can maximize their benefits and enhance their online casino experience. Always remember to gamble responsibly and view bonuses as a way to extend your playtime and enjoyment, rather than a guaranteed path to profit. |
2024.05.14 16:17 RandolphCarter15 My intro course is a lot more rigorous than others. What should I do?
We've been having conversations in my Department about what we teach, as everyone sets their own syllabi. I tend to be one of the lower rated Professors and I was at peace with that...
... Until I found out what my colleagues teach. In my intro course I have students read and critique academic articles and apply this through policy and academic writing assignments.
The other people who teach intro courses in my area don't do any of that. One only assigns the textbook, so the readings are a lot easier. The other does that and doesn't even have any writing.
The students like both of their classes more. I just assumed they were better teachers, and maybe they are, but this disparity in what we expect has to be part of it.
I think students should learn how to read and apply academic scholarship so won't stop doing this. But for annual assessments and promotion my evals are compared to others in the Department and I just don't think that is fair.
Should I defend my approach in my assessments, or is that too defensive?
submitted by RandolphCarter15 to Professors [link] [comments]
... Until I found out what my colleagues teach. In my intro course I have students read and critique academic articles and apply this through policy and academic writing assignments.
The other people who teach intro courses in my area don't do any of that. One only assigns the textbook, so the readings are a lot easier. The other does that and doesn't even have any writing.
The students like both of their classes more. I just assumed they were better teachers, and maybe they are, but this disparity in what we expect has to be part of it.
I think students should learn how to read and apply academic scholarship so won't stop doing this. But for annual assessments and promotion my evals are compared to others in the Department and I just don't think that is fair.
Should I defend my approach in my assessments, or is that too defensive?
2024.05.14 16:05 Sad_Bat7625 Feeling guilt for messaging my abusive ex
About a year ago, I [29 M] was in a toxic relationship with J [29 M]. While there were no serious stakes in it (no kids or messy finances), the relationship and breakup ended up emotionally affecting me in a way I had never really thought possible. I feel guilty because after the relationship I tried to be friends with my ex still, which I now see as a mistake in the context of this relationship, and then after a few months, he blocked me because I didn't respect a boundary he had set about not sending him long messages. He said he didn't feel safe since I "completely ignored" the boundary.
I was devastated, but over the course of the next few months, came to understand a great deal of ways that I feel that I had been abused during the relationship. I felt angrier and angrier, and even though I was seeing a therapist, it eventually boiled over. My ex had blocked me on discord and probably on text, but I went onto an astrology app called Co-Star that he had had me download, and sent a message using it that said something like, "You were an abusive partner, but you can make it right with an apology."
Now, I have no idea if he actually saw the message. It was sent with a weird feature of the app called Chaos Mode that apparently chooses to send the message at some future time, so who knows if it actually ever sent. I don't know if he still has the app, if he unfriended me, or whatnot. But I feel guilty because I enacted exactly the caricature of me that he had created--I hadn't respected his boundaries, and I sent the message anyways.
At the same time, I am still feeling very victimized by the relationship. To give you a sense of the kinds of things that were going on in the relationship, here's a few examples that I currently find a little horrific [Note: this kind of turned into a summary of the relationship after I wrote it]. I'm aware that to heal I should probably not be ruminating about these things, especially if they lead me to boil over and message him, but here you go.
The first time I had sex with him, he slammed the door on me for not being able to finish and said "finish yourself." When I came to bed, I told him I felt shame. He said "good." The next time we had sex, he set a timer for me and said I had to finish within 5 minutes. These were the first times I ever had sex. He was manipulative in bed, telling me he didn't want to perform certain acts because I didn't give him enough praise for them, so that I started exaggerating my pleasure; he blamed me for why certain positions weren't working and was frustrated with how my body worked. On top of this, he admitted at the end of the relationship to having had sex with me around five times after he decided to break up with me (before he did), which just makes me feel a bit icky.
He would put me down in pretty transparently cruel ways. One example was when I exerted myself, he said I sounded like a muppet and that he "didn't want to be dating a muppet." When I offered him a blanket but apologized that it might not have been washed in a while, he called me a baby. He would insult my ability to give complements, asking me to tell him what color his eyes are but then rejecting everything that I gave him, telling me I was bad at complements repeatedly (and saying that it wasn't fair of him because his other exes were artists, so no wonder I was bad). Now, there were times that he was complementary to me--he told me I was hot, good at singing, good at writing, smart--but also times where he would put me down for things I was less good at, like cooking.
He constantly made me feel insecure about my gender. (For context, we are both men, but he was raised as a woman). So he would make pretty sweeping feminist critiques over fairly mundane things, like if I complained when I was sick he would go off about how men are always babies when they are sick and women don't get attention. When I confronted him about some of the things he was saying, telling him that while I wanted him to express these kinds of social problems so that I could be aware and adapt, I was feeling insecure in the relationship--he flipped it around and told me that if I didn't feel loved, he could say "I love you" less, and that I hadn't been grateful enough for when he came to visit me. (I had written him poetry, deep cleaned my apartment, taken time off work, sent my roommate off for the week, bought him a bus pass, planned his visit, met him in the airport despite not having a car, and just an insane amount of work to be turned into, "you weren't grateful enough").
Other than namecalling, he was just plain controlling. The reason that the boundary around me not sending long messages exists is that when I felt insecure--which I think makes sense given the ways he would talk to me--I would often send him a few paragraphs apologizing and explaining how I was growing. Even though long messages were the first thing he said he loved about me, and that he said our communication was like magic, he eventually set up what he called an "Essay embargo" and told me not to write them. The first time he set the "embargo", he had said it was only until we met in person because he didn't want me to write anything that would make him nervous. After we met in person, I assumed the embargo had lifted. Yet shortly after, he set it again, giving a few explanations--the main one just being that he wanted to appreciate our relationship without overthinking it. It seemed playful. He definitely did also say that long messages made him uncomfortable because he felt obligated to send a response. So, when I did send messages, I would add that he didn't have to respond (which I realize is not fully respecting the boundary). I did ask after sending messages whether they were ok and he never responded to those questions.
Despite this, there were times during the relationship that I continued to send long, often apologetic messages. I had felt like this boundary was set playfully and I also was feeling overwhelming guilt that I, for whatever reason, needed his affirmation for. I am conflicted because on the one hand, I was definitely ignoring his boundary--but on the other, I feel like the boundary was not very thoughtful of my own needs, either.
Prior to the breakup, it was hell. He was getting angry at me for everything--for pretty mundane things like using the bathroom before him and stinking it up. He told me he had to show me how to do everything, but I realize now that a lot of this was just him being particular (e.g, he told me I don't know how to drink tea because I left the bag in, when I just like it strong). Unfortunately, I had flown 5,000 miles to visit him and was sort of trapped in his proximity, and was drunk on love still since I was trying very hard, it was my first relationship, and he had sold me on notions of fairytale romance and told me we were cosmically meant to be together and other lovebomby sort of things. We flew to a convention and I met some of his friends, and at one point he introduced me to a girl he had almost dated before, saying I was a friend and not a partner. I pointed this out to him later and he just said "does that make you angry?". He flirted with a woman at a party, telling her she was pretty while demanding that i bring him snacks (I feel so, so weak for not confronting him about this). He got drunk and I stayed with him as he passed out, but he was angry at me in the morning. When one of his friends told me they thought I was nice, because i was opening doors for everyone, my ex said "Is he really?" Questioning them.
The breakup itself was cold and calculated. He started it by telling me that he thought about not giving me any reasons for the breakup because I always overanalyze things. He told me he wouldn't have broken up with me if I was a woman. He told me I didn't take care of him and he needs a partner that takes care of him, and that his partners always feel taken care of. He threw some things I had said at the beginning of the relationship back at me--misquoting and misunderstanding them.
After the relationship, I had no idea what to think. It was my first relationship. It had started with fairytale romance. I had been passing his tests, I had been an exception to his long string of abusive relationships. He presented himself as this incredibly moral person (vegan, environmentally conscious, telling me of all of the ways others had abused him that he would never do, even his closest friends). I had completely internalized criticisms that he had had of me throughout the relationship, many of which had led to serious self reflection and my writing messages about my growth. Within a week I told him I still loved him and that I always would. He reminded me of his boundary around long messages and said they made him anxious. I was desperate. We took a few weeks of no-contact. We messaged short-messages back and forth, with a few life-updates to eachother each. He told me he was rescuing a kitten that he found, and I remembered how he could be kind.
But as I processed, more and more, I felt angry. I wrote unsent angry letters in the notes app on my phone for a month. I wrote myself a 20,000 word summary of the relationship. This was not a healthy way to process. It elevated me. (Some of you will probably comment that maybe I shouldn't have written this post for the same reason, but oh well--I wanted to process and I want to hear if others have similar stories). Meanwhile, my ex kept pushing back the date for when we would verbally connect again. Eventually, I boiled over. I did not insult him. But I wrote a long message explaining that I wanted to take 3 months of no-contact. I had entered another relationship and told him that even though I was feeling angry at him, he shouldn't be worried because even though I had baggage from the relationship, I was communicating well with my new partner. I also told him that I felt like if I did talk with him, that I would end up tearing him a new one, and that I needed time to cool down. I'm not proud of the message in general, but I didn't call names, tell him he was awful, or anything like that. I was just insensitive and told him I was angry.
And like that, I was blocked. It was over. A period of about 9 months, five of which we were together, with two before escalating towards love bombing and two after escalating towards my boiling over.
And yet, I had never expressed to him that I thought he had been abusive. I felt frustrated that I had told him that I would always love him, when in many ways now I hated him.
Five months passed, during which I came to realize more and more how messed up the relationship was.
And then I sent the message on Co-star.
Fast forward another four months to now.
I just sent him a text, knowing he probably has blocked me there too. It said something like, "I want my last message to you just be: I'm sorry, and I forgive you." I wanted to free myself. I needed to not feel angry at him or ashamed of myself. I needed to not feel like I had a million things to say to him--I needed to just say, this is it: I'm not sending more messages. I'm sorry, and I forgive you. It was for myself. I was forgiving him selfishly, even though he didn't deserve it, so that I could move on.
I feel like I shouldn't have sent this, but I don't feel bad about it yet, either. I needed closure. It always felt like there was some "message I could send" to detail his abuse, and I needed to not have that standing over me--I needed to forgive. I am now oscillating between wondering about myself--whether I have a problem with boundaries, since I had boiled over at this point three times to message him. Feeling frustrated I didn't assert myself about his abuse, that I doubled down on loving him. Part of me is glad that I sent the message on Co-Star saying that he was abusive, because it was the only indication I ever gave him, really, that what he did wasn't ok to me--he had blocked me before I could articulate anything. But I also know that this message even if received would not mean anything to him.
Anyways, now I'm venting about it here on Reddit. Does anyone have similar experiences surrounding self control messaging exes and feeling a bit out of control?
submitted by Sad_Bat7625 to emotionalabuse [link] [comments]
I was devastated, but over the course of the next few months, came to understand a great deal of ways that I feel that I had been abused during the relationship. I felt angrier and angrier, and even though I was seeing a therapist, it eventually boiled over. My ex had blocked me on discord and probably on text, but I went onto an astrology app called Co-Star that he had had me download, and sent a message using it that said something like, "You were an abusive partner, but you can make it right with an apology."
Now, I have no idea if he actually saw the message. It was sent with a weird feature of the app called Chaos Mode that apparently chooses to send the message at some future time, so who knows if it actually ever sent. I don't know if he still has the app, if he unfriended me, or whatnot. But I feel guilty because I enacted exactly the caricature of me that he had created--I hadn't respected his boundaries, and I sent the message anyways.
At the same time, I am still feeling very victimized by the relationship. To give you a sense of the kinds of things that were going on in the relationship, here's a few examples that I currently find a little horrific [Note: this kind of turned into a summary of the relationship after I wrote it]. I'm aware that to heal I should probably not be ruminating about these things, especially if they lead me to boil over and message him, but here you go.
The first time I had sex with him, he slammed the door on me for not being able to finish and said "finish yourself." When I came to bed, I told him I felt shame. He said "good." The next time we had sex, he set a timer for me and said I had to finish within 5 minutes. These were the first times I ever had sex. He was manipulative in bed, telling me he didn't want to perform certain acts because I didn't give him enough praise for them, so that I started exaggerating my pleasure; he blamed me for why certain positions weren't working and was frustrated with how my body worked. On top of this, he admitted at the end of the relationship to having had sex with me around five times after he decided to break up with me (before he did), which just makes me feel a bit icky.
He would put me down in pretty transparently cruel ways. One example was when I exerted myself, he said I sounded like a muppet and that he "didn't want to be dating a muppet." When I offered him a blanket but apologized that it might not have been washed in a while, he called me a baby. He would insult my ability to give complements, asking me to tell him what color his eyes are but then rejecting everything that I gave him, telling me I was bad at complements repeatedly (and saying that it wasn't fair of him because his other exes were artists, so no wonder I was bad). Now, there were times that he was complementary to me--he told me I was hot, good at singing, good at writing, smart--but also times where he would put me down for things I was less good at, like cooking.
He constantly made me feel insecure about my gender. (For context, we are both men, but he was raised as a woman). So he would make pretty sweeping feminist critiques over fairly mundane things, like if I complained when I was sick he would go off about how men are always babies when they are sick and women don't get attention. When I confronted him about some of the things he was saying, telling him that while I wanted him to express these kinds of social problems so that I could be aware and adapt, I was feeling insecure in the relationship--he flipped it around and told me that if I didn't feel loved, he could say "I love you" less, and that I hadn't been grateful enough for when he came to visit me. (I had written him poetry, deep cleaned my apartment, taken time off work, sent my roommate off for the week, bought him a bus pass, planned his visit, met him in the airport despite not having a car, and just an insane amount of work to be turned into, "you weren't grateful enough").
Other than namecalling, he was just plain controlling. The reason that the boundary around me not sending long messages exists is that when I felt insecure--which I think makes sense given the ways he would talk to me--I would often send him a few paragraphs apologizing and explaining how I was growing. Even though long messages were the first thing he said he loved about me, and that he said our communication was like magic, he eventually set up what he called an "Essay embargo" and told me not to write them. The first time he set the "embargo", he had said it was only until we met in person because he didn't want me to write anything that would make him nervous. After we met in person, I assumed the embargo had lifted. Yet shortly after, he set it again, giving a few explanations--the main one just being that he wanted to appreciate our relationship without overthinking it. It seemed playful. He definitely did also say that long messages made him uncomfortable because he felt obligated to send a response. So, when I did send messages, I would add that he didn't have to respond (which I realize is not fully respecting the boundary). I did ask after sending messages whether they were ok and he never responded to those questions.
Despite this, there were times during the relationship that I continued to send long, often apologetic messages. I had felt like this boundary was set playfully and I also was feeling overwhelming guilt that I, for whatever reason, needed his affirmation for. I am conflicted because on the one hand, I was definitely ignoring his boundary--but on the other, I feel like the boundary was not very thoughtful of my own needs, either.
Prior to the breakup, it was hell. He was getting angry at me for everything--for pretty mundane things like using the bathroom before him and stinking it up. He told me he had to show me how to do everything, but I realize now that a lot of this was just him being particular (e.g, he told me I don't know how to drink tea because I left the bag in, when I just like it strong). Unfortunately, I had flown 5,000 miles to visit him and was sort of trapped in his proximity, and was drunk on love still since I was trying very hard, it was my first relationship, and he had sold me on notions of fairytale romance and told me we were cosmically meant to be together and other lovebomby sort of things. We flew to a convention and I met some of his friends, and at one point he introduced me to a girl he had almost dated before, saying I was a friend and not a partner. I pointed this out to him later and he just said "does that make you angry?". He flirted with a woman at a party, telling her she was pretty while demanding that i bring him snacks (I feel so, so weak for not confronting him about this). He got drunk and I stayed with him as he passed out, but he was angry at me in the morning. When one of his friends told me they thought I was nice, because i was opening doors for everyone, my ex said "Is he really?" Questioning them.
The breakup itself was cold and calculated. He started it by telling me that he thought about not giving me any reasons for the breakup because I always overanalyze things. He told me he wouldn't have broken up with me if I was a woman. He told me I didn't take care of him and he needs a partner that takes care of him, and that his partners always feel taken care of. He threw some things I had said at the beginning of the relationship back at me--misquoting and misunderstanding them.
After the relationship, I had no idea what to think. It was my first relationship. It had started with fairytale romance. I had been passing his tests, I had been an exception to his long string of abusive relationships. He presented himself as this incredibly moral person (vegan, environmentally conscious, telling me of all of the ways others had abused him that he would never do, even his closest friends). I had completely internalized criticisms that he had had of me throughout the relationship, many of which had led to serious self reflection and my writing messages about my growth. Within a week I told him I still loved him and that I always would. He reminded me of his boundary around long messages and said they made him anxious. I was desperate. We took a few weeks of no-contact. We messaged short-messages back and forth, with a few life-updates to eachother each. He told me he was rescuing a kitten that he found, and I remembered how he could be kind.
But as I processed, more and more, I felt angry. I wrote unsent angry letters in the notes app on my phone for a month. I wrote myself a 20,000 word summary of the relationship. This was not a healthy way to process. It elevated me. (Some of you will probably comment that maybe I shouldn't have written this post for the same reason, but oh well--I wanted to process and I want to hear if others have similar stories). Meanwhile, my ex kept pushing back the date for when we would verbally connect again. Eventually, I boiled over. I did not insult him. But I wrote a long message explaining that I wanted to take 3 months of no-contact. I had entered another relationship and told him that even though I was feeling angry at him, he shouldn't be worried because even though I had baggage from the relationship, I was communicating well with my new partner. I also told him that I felt like if I did talk with him, that I would end up tearing him a new one, and that I needed time to cool down. I'm not proud of the message in general, but I didn't call names, tell him he was awful, or anything like that. I was just insensitive and told him I was angry.
And like that, I was blocked. It was over. A period of about 9 months, five of which we were together, with two before escalating towards love bombing and two after escalating towards my boiling over.
And yet, I had never expressed to him that I thought he had been abusive. I felt frustrated that I had told him that I would always love him, when in many ways now I hated him.
Five months passed, during which I came to realize more and more how messed up the relationship was.
And then I sent the message on Co-star.
Fast forward another four months to now.
I just sent him a text, knowing he probably has blocked me there too. It said something like, "I want my last message to you just be: I'm sorry, and I forgive you." I wanted to free myself. I needed to not feel angry at him or ashamed of myself. I needed to not feel like I had a million things to say to him--I needed to just say, this is it: I'm not sending more messages. I'm sorry, and I forgive you. It was for myself. I was forgiving him selfishly, even though he didn't deserve it, so that I could move on.
I feel like I shouldn't have sent this, but I don't feel bad about it yet, either. I needed closure. It always felt like there was some "message I could send" to detail his abuse, and I needed to not have that standing over me--I needed to forgive. I am now oscillating between wondering about myself--whether I have a problem with boundaries, since I had boiled over at this point three times to message him. Feeling frustrated I didn't assert myself about his abuse, that I doubled down on loving him. Part of me is glad that I sent the message on Co-Star saying that he was abusive, because it was the only indication I ever gave him, really, that what he did wasn't ok to me--he had blocked me before I could articulate anything. But I also know that this message even if received would not mean anything to him.
Anyways, now I'm venting about it here on Reddit. Does anyone have similar experiences surrounding self control messaging exes and feeling a bit out of control?
2024.05.14 16:00 UnDead_Ted What Really is Faith? Truths to Boost Your Walk of Faith
 | Here's one of the most surprising things I've encountered personally and as a minister in spiritual life: believers struggling with believing God’s Word. The more I interact with other Christians in our ministry, including pastors and ministers, the more I realize we truly have a faith problem in the Church. While there are many reasons for this, today we will get back to Faith 101 to discuss fatih from first principles in a way that you will absorb and understand fully—I pray! I want to share a few truths to help clarify what faith means, starting with the basics. submitted by UnDead_Ted to TheDailyDose [link] [comments] https://preview.redd.it/oe0p17l9b1wc1.png?width=640&format=png&auto=webp&s=2e0a381c4f09374808fa7aa317c2ce925dff6b7d The Error of “Acting to Prove Your Faith”Years ago, after absorbing numerous teachings on faith to resolve my own faith problems, I adhered to a common notion from my Pentecostal background. Since faith implies action, you must do something to "release" or "activate" your faith. Believing in God for financial provision, I brainstormed ways to “prove I have believed” or “release my faith”. I began doing things to “show that I have believed”—a major faith error.Here’s another poignant example from my dual role as a doctor and minister: witnessing Christians stop taking medications or rejecting medical treatments "in faith," leading to disastrous results. Tip: Faith is seen in our actions, but we must not prove it artificially. What we truly believe will show how we naturally talk and act when we are "not in a conditioned faith mode". These two examples underscore one problem: there is a widespread misunderstanding of what faith really is and how it works, especially among us charismatics or Pentecostals. Understanding Faith from Everyday LifeThis simple yet profound insight can unlock a deeper understanding of faith: the principle of faith is integral to our everyday life.I'll use everyday examples to illustrate how we already operate under the principle of faith in daily matters and then highlight how this differs from our faith in Christ. A Young Woman with Many Suitors https://preview.redd.it/mxjgnyneb1wc1.png?width=640&format=png&auto=webp&s=45d2ba20a6097889a20e043f4bd2817d424bb30c Consider a young woman courted by multiple suitors. Naturally, she desires to know their true characters, aiming for a partner who would treat her with love, respect, and tenderness. Upon learning from a trusted friend that one suitor is disrespectful and abusive, she believes this information and naturally rejects him. This reaction embodies the principle of faith: hearing information, believing it, and acting accordingly.
Let's consider another example I discussed in our last Bible study this week. Imagine you're in your living room, watching me teach the Word of God on YouTube. Suddenly, your five-year-old daughter rushes in and exclaims, "Daddy, an airplane is going to crash on our roof!" How would you react?
Now, imagine a different scenario in which it's not your child but the police chief of your city—a person you know and trust—who calls and urgently tells you to evacuate your home because an airplane is about to crash on it. What would you do then? You'd probably leave your house immediately. Why? because you trust the police chief's reliability and would act on his warning without hesitation. Brethren, this is essentially what faith is. It is the way we act based on the things we believe.
And when he saw their faith, he said unto him, Man, thy sins are forgiven thee. (Luke 5:20, KJV) The Principle of Faith and Faith in ChristWhat distinguishes the principle of faith we use in everyday life from the faith we have in Christ?Even Atheist Believe! Every person, whether Christian or not, has the capacity to believe. For instance, atheists exercise this principle of faith, too—they believe there is no God and thus reject Christ based on this gravely mistaken belief. However, here’s the point: This belief shapes their lives profoundly, underscoring the fact that people can believe what is wrong, leading them astray. In fact, God calls the atheist a fool for this reason, The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, There is none that doeth good." (Psalm 14:1, KJV). Thus, even those who deny God's existence are inadvertently following a principle of faith by adhering to their beliefs. https://preview.redd.it/4wey44qob1wc1.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=f8fdfd267d3dfdbb61bfa8334e83e390abb2e967 What About Demons? Moreover, Scripture tells us that even demons believe in God’s existence: Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble." (James 2:19, KJV). This highlights that mere belief in existence is not sufficient for saving faith. The critical difference between the everyday principle of faith and the faith in Christ lies in the specifics of what is believed and how it directs our lives.
No one can say 'Jesus is Lord' except by the Holy Spirit." (1 Corinthians 12:3, KJV). This underscores the essential role of the Holy Spirit in transforming our understanding and acceptance of God's truth, moving us beyond simple human belief into a profound, spiritually enabled faith. What Really is Faith?To distill the essence of faith without delving too deeply into technicalities, consider the simple illustrations mentioned earlier. Faith is essentially how you act based on the Word of God you believe to be true. It comprises two main aspects: Believing Faith starts with accepting the Word of God as true. Today, a significant problem with faith is that while many can verbally speak to mountains of disease, demons, or poverty to move, very few deeply believe in their heart that such commands will work.
The core of this newsletter is about how your beliefs manifest naturally in your actions. You don’t need to force or "act out" your faith.
"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." Invest in Your FaithInvesting in your faith is one of the most crucial commitments you can make in Christianity. I once believed I was a man of faith until the Holy Spirit revealed how little I truly accepted many things I thought I believed.You might be surprised to find that your heart has not truly embraced many truths of the Scriptures you assumed you believed. For instance, if you believe you can command a demon and it will obey, that belief will transform how you live. Imagine if Christians truly believe that, it will change how we act! Here are my recommendations for boosting your faith:
|
2024.05.14 16:00 ValoBot VALORANT 8.09 Bug Megathread
Greetings Agents!
New patch, new Bug Megathread! To avoid bug reports cluttering the subreddit and/or going unnoticed, a Megathread is posted after every patch so users may submit reports in one place. This allows Riot to easily keep track of the bugs by providing a central hub and also allows other users to confirm that they might have encountered the issue as well.
• Type of Bug: Matchmaking
• Description: Matchmaking doesn't work properly
• Video / Screenshot: image/video hosting site link
• Steps to Reproduce: Try to launch a game
• Expected Result: Match starting
• Observed Result: Getting stuck in infinite queue
• Reproduction Rate: 10/10 (happened 10 out of 10 times)
• System Specs: Intel i5 Processor, Windows 7, Nvidia Graphics card (insert model number) etc.
From this Megathread the list of bugs will not be summarized and put up in the main body of the thread. Instead, Rioters go through and log all comments -- don't worry if you submit the 1500th or 3000th comment, they will all be progressively read.
submitted by ValoBot to VALORANT [link] [comments]
New patch, new Bug Megathread! To avoid bug reports cluttering the subreddit and/or going unnoticed, a Megathread is posted after every patch so users may submit reports in one place. This allows Riot to easily keep track of the bugs by providing a central hub and also allows other users to confirm that they might have encountered the issue as well.
View the Current VALORANT Patch Notes!
Official Sources
Submit an Official VALORANT Support Ticket
Official Article on VALORANT Error Codes
VALORANT Server Status by Region
Community Help
Find Additional Help on /ValorantTechSupport
Seek Help In the /VALORANT Discord
Reporting a Bug
- A bug will ideally be accompanied with a screenshot or a video. This provides credibility to your report.
- Steps to recreate the bugs should be submitted if possible. This helps Rioters recreate the bug and helps them find the cause behind it.
- Unformatted, mematic, or joke reports are automatically indexed and may be removed by moderators to reduce the effort needed from Riot to view all reports.
Formatting
Reddit Formatting GuideWhen reporting a bug, please provide as much information as you can about your computer.
- Region: - Type of Bug: - Description: - Video / Screenshot: - Steps to Reproduce: - Expected Result: - Observed Result: - Reproduction Rate: - System Specs:Copy paste the above text as a comment below and fill in your details!
Example Bug Report
• Region: EU• Type of Bug: Matchmaking
• Description: Matchmaking doesn't work properly
• Video / Screenshot: image/video hosting site link
• Steps to Reproduce: Try to launch a game
• Expected Result: Match starting
• Observed Result: Getting stuck in infinite queue
• Reproduction Rate: 10/10 (happened 10 out of 10 times)
• System Specs: Intel i5 Processor, Windows 7, Nvidia Graphics card (insert model number) etc.
2024.05.14 15:52 xMysticChimez The Inner Zodiac by Michael Tsarion
🌿 Detailed Overview:
Explores the esoteric significance of the zodiacal signs, delving beyond their traditional astrological meanings. Tsarion posits that each zodiac sign represents not just personality traits but also deeper spiritual and psychological archetypes that influence human lives.
🔍 Key Themes and Insights:
Archetypal Forces: Tsarion interprets each zodiac sign as embodying a specific archetype or universal force that shapes human consciousness and behavior. He discusses how these archetypes manifest in different aspects of life, including relationships, career, and personal development.
Psychological Dynamics: Examines how the zodiacal archetypes influence individual psychology, shaping personality traits, strengths, and challenges. Tsarion suggests that understanding these dynamics can lead to greater self-awareness and personal growth.
Spiritual Evolution: Links the zodiacal archetypes to spiritual evolution, suggesting that each sign represents a stage of growth and transformation on the path to higher consciousness. He explores how working with these archetypes can facilitate spiritual awakening and enlightenment.
Mythological Connections: Draws connections between the zodiacal signs and ancient myths and legends, showing how these stories reflect the deeper meanings and influences of the signs in human life.
Practical Applications: While rooted in esoteric philosophy, the article offers practical insights for applying the wisdom of the zodiac to everyday life, including guidance on how to work with the energies of each sign for personal development and self-improvement.
Audience Takeaway:
"The Inner Zodiac" provides a unique perspective on the zodiacal signs, presenting them as keys to unlocking the mysteries of the human psyche and the cosmos. It is a valuable resource for anyone interested in astrology, psychology, mythology, or spirituality, offering a deep dive into the hidden meanings of the zodiacal archetypes.
💌 Your Experiences and Reflections:
Have you explored the zodiac beyond its traditional astrological meanings? How has Michael Tsarion's interpretation of the inner zodiac influenced your understanding of yourself and others? Share your reflections on the archetypal forces at play in your life and the transformative power of working with the zodiacal energies.
submitted by xMysticChimez to MeditationHub [link] [comments]
Explores the esoteric significance of the zodiacal signs, delving beyond their traditional astrological meanings. Tsarion posits that each zodiac sign represents not just personality traits but also deeper spiritual and psychological archetypes that influence human lives.
🔍 Key Themes and Insights:
Archetypal Forces: Tsarion interprets each zodiac sign as embodying a specific archetype or universal force that shapes human consciousness and behavior. He discusses how these archetypes manifest in different aspects of life, including relationships, career, and personal development.
Psychological Dynamics: Examines how the zodiacal archetypes influence individual psychology, shaping personality traits, strengths, and challenges. Tsarion suggests that understanding these dynamics can lead to greater self-awareness and personal growth.
Spiritual Evolution: Links the zodiacal archetypes to spiritual evolution, suggesting that each sign represents a stage of growth and transformation on the path to higher consciousness. He explores how working with these archetypes can facilitate spiritual awakening and enlightenment.
Mythological Connections: Draws connections between the zodiacal signs and ancient myths and legends, showing how these stories reflect the deeper meanings and influences of the signs in human life.
Practical Applications: While rooted in esoteric philosophy, the article offers practical insights for applying the wisdom of the zodiac to everyday life, including guidance on how to work with the energies of each sign for personal development and self-improvement.
Audience Takeaway:
"The Inner Zodiac" provides a unique perspective on the zodiacal signs, presenting them as keys to unlocking the mysteries of the human psyche and the cosmos. It is a valuable resource for anyone interested in astrology, psychology, mythology, or spirituality, offering a deep dive into the hidden meanings of the zodiacal archetypes.
💌 Your Experiences and Reflections:
Have you explored the zodiac beyond its traditional astrological meanings? How has Michael Tsarion's interpretation of the inner zodiac influenced your understanding of yourself and others? Share your reflections on the archetypal forces at play in your life and the transformative power of working with the zodiacal energies.
2024.05.14 15:47 stranglethebars The likes of Foucault, Fromm, Goffman, Deleuze and Guattari have criticised various aspects of psychology and psychiatry. To what extent have these fields adjusted in accordance with those criticisms?
I'll give some examples of the kind of criticism I have in mind...
Fromm:
Finally, if a psychology student told you that they've never heard of Foucault, Fromm, Deleuze, Guattari or Popper, and that they therefore questioned your sources, would you find that suspicious or not? Would it mainly make you wonder
a) whether these names are considered irrelevant by psychologists etc. today (a possible reason being that their criticisms were largely accepted and acted on a long time ago), or
b) whether the student has tunnel vision?
Or perhaps:
c) both of the above, in equal measure?
submitted by stranglethebars to CriticalTheory [link] [comments]
Fromm:
In The Sane Society (1955), Fromm wrote "An unhealthy society is one which creates mutual hostility [and] distrust, which transforms man into an instrument of use and exploitation for others, which deprives him of a sense of self, except inasmuch as he submits to others or becomes an automaton"..."Yet many psychiatrists and psychologists refuse to entertain the idea that society as a whole may be lacking in sanity. They hold that the problem of mental health in a society is only that of the number of 'unadjusted' individuals, and not of a possible unadjustment of the culture itself".Foucault:
Intellectual philosopher Michel Foucault challenged the very basis of psychiatric practice and cast it as repressive and controlling.And:
It has been argued by philosophers like Foucault that characterizations of "mental illness" are indeterminate and reflect the hierarchical structures of the societies from which they emerge rather than any precisely defined qualities that distinguish a "healthy" mind from a "sick" one. Furthermore, if a tendency toward self-harm is taken as an elementary symptom of mental illness, then humans, as a species, are arguably insane in that they have tended throughout recorded history to destroy their own environments, to make war with one another, etc.Goffman, Deleuze and Guattari:
Erving Goffman, Gilles Deleuze, Félix Guattari and others criticized the power and role of psychiatry in society, including the use of "total institutions" and the use of models and terms that were seen as stigmatizing.As far as trying to answer my own question goes... Among the names I mentioned, it's only Goffman (ok, maybe Fromm too) I haven't been familiar with since 2006. However, while I have come across references to their criticisms of psychiatry/psychology, I haven't thoroughly explored those. I haven't even regularly explored these authors over the years, nor the fields of psychology and psychiatry, so it's difficult for me to estimate to what extent the criticisms I mentioned have been accepted by the disciplines. However, I also saw this part about Foucault:
The French sociologist and philosopher Foucault, in his 1961 publication Madness and Civilization: A History of Insanity in the Age of Reason, analyzed how attitudes towards those deemed "insane" had changed as a result of changes in social values. He argued that psychiatry was primarily a tool of social control, based historically on a "great confinement" of the insane and physical punishment and chains, later exchanged in the moral treatment era for psychological oppression and internalized restraint....which, unless I'm misinterpreting/overly simplifying something, suggests that Foucault thought that the development was positive, which, in turn, could be a clue as to my question.
Finally, if a psychology student told you that they've never heard of Foucault, Fromm, Deleuze, Guattari or Popper, and that they therefore questioned your sources, would you find that suspicious or not? Would it mainly make you wonder
a) whether these names are considered irrelevant by psychologists etc. today (a possible reason being that their criticisms were largely accepted and acted on a long time ago), or
b) whether the student has tunnel vision?
Or perhaps:
c) both of the above, in equal measure?
2024.05.14 15:47 HikingScribbler Making a Visual WordPress Writing Portfolio
I have a small WordPress website where I host my portfolio. Right now, the portfolio lists an article's title, where it was published, and a link to the article. It does the job, but isn't very exciting or engaging. I'm looking for ways to make it more visual and engaging. I thought about using iframes to pull in a preview of the articles, but some of my clients have websites that block that. Anyone out there have suggestions or examples of great portfolios?
submitted by HikingScribbler to freelancewriting [link] [comments]
2024.05.14 15:43 asciipip Best Practices for Font Specimen Images?
I like the style of small font specimen images used on a lot of Wikipedia articles. There are a lot of examples in the third column in the list of serif typefaces. I'm trying to put together a program to generate images for my local fonts as an aid to keeping myself organized. Here's an example of what I have at the moment.
But I have a few questions that hopefully people here can answer.
submitted by asciipip to typography [link] [comments]
But I have a few questions that hopefully people here can answer.
- Is there a name for this style of specimen image? Are these specific to Wikipedia, or is there some broader usage in play?
- If this is a semi-common format, are there any best practices around its design? The styles on Wikipedia are all over the place.
- Is there some ideal set of letters that would be good to use by default? I'd like to have reasonable defaults so I can easily generate images for all my collected fonts. Then I can go through later, when I have time, and customize each image to use letters that highlight the specific font's characteristics.
2024.05.14 15:28 Lilac5555 Reasons to celebrate black sheep trauma survivors
This article from Psychology Today I feel resonates with a lot of us who have gone no-contact or don’t get along with our Qanon family members. It celebrates those who break unhealthy cycles and don’t go along with dysfunctional family dynamics. Figured I’d share since it gave me some validation.
submitted by Lilac5555 to QAnonCasualties [link] [comments]
2024.05.14 15:07 smartesteveryday My reasons for not donating to Creators for Palestine
Hi there,
I wanted to take the time to write out a detailed explanation as to why some people might be hesitant donating to charitable organizations and why I personally would be in the 5% of people who would not follow Ludwig's recommendation of donating to Creators for Palestine. I'm also not here to be antagonistic towards others who donated but merely offer my perspective and decision making process as someone who has gathered knowledge about economics as well as psychology due to curiosity, specifically when it comes to the potential for corruption and ensuring money spent is used towards the goals a charitable organization is expressing.
I also wanted to thank Ludwig for his respectful acknowledgement of the fact that not everyone would be prepared to donate like he did. I don't like how he's been treated for doing that and perhaps offering my point of view in detail will give some weight to that perspective and get people to empathize with both my position and his intent to validate others who see things differently.
World economics is something I became curious and interested in due to the 2008 financial collapse. It seemed mindboggling to me that various trusted institutions would engage in manipulative behavior on such a massive scale, something that many documentaries have covered as well as the movie The Big Short.
My interest did not stop there. A lesser publicized story regarding the HSBC also manifested between then and now that shares insights into how our modern economy operates and how that manipulative behavior, which has yet to be criminalized and legislated against, is leading to funding organizations who are harming the public at large.
There have been little amendments to that very system as a whole and charities, are also entities that are financial institutions that can be used for illicit purposes as they exist in this very space that lacks proper oversight and regulations due to what is permitted on the global economic stage which is the hiding of assets and the effortlessness of creating corporate entities out of thin air. We've seen evidence of this being reported as well when it comes to charitable organizations claiming they're doing something for a cause, only to funnel that money towards harmful and exploitative actors.
Basically, if you have the capital, you can set up a meeting with a law firm, assign a signatory, or even hire one through them and whatever happens with that account, is going to be completely untraceable and outside of public scrutiny. One of the reasons we now have this information is due to the tireless work of the ICIJ and their release of the Paradise Papers as well as other investigative works they undertook regarding the offshore economy.
Because of this, for me, a charitable organization needs to have an established record and a history of demonstrable humanitarian support, in order for me to sign up with them. Things like food banks for example, will have a long history of providing a population food. In fact, one of the best things you can do is give them money as they will be more effective when it comes to meeting demands vs having a surplus that is perishable and can expire.
When one looks at the PCRF, one can see that it was established in 1991. That means there's a longstanding record of their operations and effectiveness. However, when one looks at that record, one is met with some startling discoveries.
One such discovery is that its operational budget for 2021 was 13.7 million, which is money that didn't get to the children of Palestine. It took in 21.7 million, which means that only 7.3 million dollars of that money was supposedly provided to relief efforts. That's like 33%.
Then you have the instance of the US Treasury deciding to freeze its assets on suspicion that it was funneling money to Hamas, which we've seen in the current economic climate and through history, is a very real threat. And that's just the tip of the iceberg as you can see on the page that I linked.
Lets say for the sake of argument that these concerns are unfounded though and that the operational costs in 2021 were justified due to the challenges of getting aid to that area of the world and that the US Treasury was engaging in a complete witch hunt and everything else has some sort of reasonable explanation.
Why, would one require a fourth party, through Tiltify, in order to then give money to the PCRF? It does not make any logical sense whatsoever to me, especially when they are actively taking a cut of charitable donations as well. The PCRF has its own website with a fully functional donation page, why involve a fourth party in that donation chain?
Another thing I look at, are the people who are leading these charitable organizations.
Michael Wasserman, the founder of Tiltify, his educational background? Is in music. All of a sudden, after embarking into the field he went to school for, this guy makes a drastic career change, launching himself into the field of philanthropy and business. That seems odd to me.
All of these reasons combined are why when someone recommends that I donate to a charity that has shown the potential for corruptive practices, my response is along the lines of no thank you. It's not because I do not empathize with the events taking place in Palestine but it comes from a place of wanting that money to get to the people in need.
When it comes to the psychology at play Dr Ramani is an expert on narcissism and she estimates that about 1 in 6 people are narcissists.
These are individuals who have no empathy to speak of. They know right from wrong but ultimately, people are just things for them to manipulate and control. More often than not, these are the people who find themselves in positions of power and control because they spend a lifetime practicing the art of manipulation and deception so they can obtain these positions by any and all means necessary.
They would have absolutely no problems using an event like what's happening in Gaza in order to gather money for themselves with the illusion of helping others and using people's empathy against them who are looking to donate to a good cause. In fact, they think they're entitled to it.
Narcissists will often do this thing called breadcrumbing where they will give a breadcrumb to someone who is starving either literally or emotionally, in order to give the perception that they are doing something when in reality it's a manipulative self-serving behavior. This would also manifest in a business because we're hierarchical creatures, their presence would lead to them having ultimate power and control over that company, its environment and a business' behaviour would reflect the personality type of that leader.
Empaths, their antithesis? Would be the ones who would take the dollars received and ensure victims get the lions share whilst keeping operational costs down.
Mirjana Spoljaric Egger strikes me as such an individual. An empath. She actually went to Gaza to see and understand the environment she was tasking herself and the organization she represents to help survivors of a historical genocidal attack from Israel at the command of Netanyahu. It seems far more probable to me that funding the International Committee of the Red Cross will achieve the goal of providing relief to survivors in desperate need.
These are the reasons why I take great care choosing what charitable organization to engage with and promote and I think it's perfectly reasonable to do so.
I'm grateful that there are people like Ludwig who respects that however I still felt a need to justify this position due to recent events that made me feel like I was doing something wrong because he was made to feel like he was doing something wrong for simply acknowledging people like me.
And it felt kinda shitty to be honest.
submitted by smartesteveryday to LudwigAhgren [link] [comments]
I wanted to take the time to write out a detailed explanation as to why some people might be hesitant donating to charitable organizations and why I personally would be in the 5% of people who would not follow Ludwig's recommendation of donating to Creators for Palestine. I'm also not here to be antagonistic towards others who donated but merely offer my perspective and decision making process as someone who has gathered knowledge about economics as well as psychology due to curiosity, specifically when it comes to the potential for corruption and ensuring money spent is used towards the goals a charitable organization is expressing.
I also wanted to thank Ludwig for his respectful acknowledgement of the fact that not everyone would be prepared to donate like he did. I don't like how he's been treated for doing that and perhaps offering my point of view in detail will give some weight to that perspective and get people to empathize with both my position and his intent to validate others who see things differently.
World economics is something I became curious and interested in due to the 2008 financial collapse. It seemed mindboggling to me that various trusted institutions would engage in manipulative behavior on such a massive scale, something that many documentaries have covered as well as the movie The Big Short.
My interest did not stop there. A lesser publicized story regarding the HSBC also manifested between then and now that shares insights into how our modern economy operates and how that manipulative behavior, which has yet to be criminalized and legislated against, is leading to funding organizations who are harming the public at large.
There have been little amendments to that very system as a whole and charities, are also entities that are financial institutions that can be used for illicit purposes as they exist in this very space that lacks proper oversight and regulations due to what is permitted on the global economic stage which is the hiding of assets and the effortlessness of creating corporate entities out of thin air. We've seen evidence of this being reported as well when it comes to charitable organizations claiming they're doing something for a cause, only to funnel that money towards harmful and exploitative actors.
Basically, if you have the capital, you can set up a meeting with a law firm, assign a signatory, or even hire one through them and whatever happens with that account, is going to be completely untraceable and outside of public scrutiny. One of the reasons we now have this information is due to the tireless work of the ICIJ and their release of the Paradise Papers as well as other investigative works they undertook regarding the offshore economy.
Because of this, for me, a charitable organization needs to have an established record and a history of demonstrable humanitarian support, in order for me to sign up with them. Things like food banks for example, will have a long history of providing a population food. In fact, one of the best things you can do is give them money as they will be more effective when it comes to meeting demands vs having a surplus that is perishable and can expire.
When one looks at the PCRF, one can see that it was established in 1991. That means there's a longstanding record of their operations and effectiveness. However, when one looks at that record, one is met with some startling discoveries.
One such discovery is that its operational budget for 2021 was 13.7 million, which is money that didn't get to the children of Palestine. It took in 21.7 million, which means that only 7.3 million dollars of that money was supposedly provided to relief efforts. That's like 33%.
Then you have the instance of the US Treasury deciding to freeze its assets on suspicion that it was funneling money to Hamas, which we've seen in the current economic climate and through history, is a very real threat. And that's just the tip of the iceberg as you can see on the page that I linked.
Lets say for the sake of argument that these concerns are unfounded though and that the operational costs in 2021 were justified due to the challenges of getting aid to that area of the world and that the US Treasury was engaging in a complete witch hunt and everything else has some sort of reasonable explanation.
Why, would one require a fourth party, through Tiltify, in order to then give money to the PCRF? It does not make any logical sense whatsoever to me, especially when they are actively taking a cut of charitable donations as well. The PCRF has its own website with a fully functional donation page, why involve a fourth party in that donation chain?
Another thing I look at, are the people who are leading these charitable organizations.
Michael Wasserman, the founder of Tiltify, his educational background? Is in music. All of a sudden, after embarking into the field he went to school for, this guy makes a drastic career change, launching himself into the field of philanthropy and business. That seems odd to me.
All of these reasons combined are why when someone recommends that I donate to a charity that has shown the potential for corruptive practices, my response is along the lines of no thank you. It's not because I do not empathize with the events taking place in Palestine but it comes from a place of wanting that money to get to the people in need.
When it comes to the psychology at play Dr Ramani is an expert on narcissism and she estimates that about 1 in 6 people are narcissists.
These are individuals who have no empathy to speak of. They know right from wrong but ultimately, people are just things for them to manipulate and control. More often than not, these are the people who find themselves in positions of power and control because they spend a lifetime practicing the art of manipulation and deception so they can obtain these positions by any and all means necessary.
They would have absolutely no problems using an event like what's happening in Gaza in order to gather money for themselves with the illusion of helping others and using people's empathy against them who are looking to donate to a good cause. In fact, they think they're entitled to it.
Narcissists will often do this thing called breadcrumbing where they will give a breadcrumb to someone who is starving either literally or emotionally, in order to give the perception that they are doing something when in reality it's a manipulative self-serving behavior. This would also manifest in a business because we're hierarchical creatures, their presence would lead to them having ultimate power and control over that company, its environment and a business' behaviour would reflect the personality type of that leader.
Empaths, their antithesis? Would be the ones who would take the dollars received and ensure victims get the lions share whilst keeping operational costs down.
Mirjana Spoljaric Egger strikes me as such an individual. An empath. She actually went to Gaza to see and understand the environment she was tasking herself and the organization she represents to help survivors of a historical genocidal attack from Israel at the command of Netanyahu. It seems far more probable to me that funding the International Committee of the Red Cross will achieve the goal of providing relief to survivors in desperate need.
These are the reasons why I take great care choosing what charitable organization to engage with and promote and I think it's perfectly reasonable to do so.
I'm grateful that there are people like Ludwig who respects that however I still felt a need to justify this position due to recent events that made me feel like I was doing something wrong because he was made to feel like he was doing something wrong for simply acknowledging people like me.
And it felt kinda shitty to be honest.