Damus

Recent Notes

R · 12w
When I say spiritual warfare, I mean there are distinct created entities (not human) in the unseen realm that are aligned or opposed to God’s plan for earth. Most commonly these are referred to a...
Simon (2.₿y.2) Kofah profile picture
Oh I absolutely agree. But there's rational atheist skeptic types who argue that supernatural framings aren't compelling. All I'm trying to imply is that even if divorced from the supernatural, the existence if a spiritual war is irrefutable.
❤️2
Simon (2.₿y.2) Kofah profile picture
I am increasingly hearing the term "spiritual warfare" pop up in the modern vernacular. Some obviously subscribe to this framing, but others I see cringe or recoil at this, as it appears to evoke religiosity and superstition.

I would argue that intentional and exacting attention needs to be paid the WORDS, however. Spiritual warfare encompasses the Christian connotation people think of. But it also has a more general meaning. I would argue that ANY struggle that transcends establishing exclusively physical submission of an opponent is spiritual. When a UFC champion takes a match into late rounds to dissect a challenger, that becomes a war of the spirit. When a prisoner of war is subjected to psychological torture, the goal is conquest of the POW's spirit. The intent is to BREAK his or her spirit.

So the question is: are there or are there not forces at play in society that strive, whether intentionally or otherwise, to break our spirit?

#thinkstr
2
R · 12w
When I say spiritual warfare, I mean there are distinct created entities (not human) in the unseen realm that are aligned or opposed to God’s plan for earth. Most commonly these are referred to as angels and demons and are distinct from the human spirit.
Simon (2.₿y.2) Kofah profile picture
Probably an unappealing take, but I believe two facts exist in opposition in modern society (specifically with respect to the male psyche):

1. Emotional intelligence, the therapy revolution, comfort with being vulnerable, etc. are generally positive forces for actualization of men - as social creatures. This is a good thing.

2. Cultivating rich emotional fluency has the directional effect of domesticating men. Of course this a generalization, and there are/will be exceptions. But, generally speaking, emotionally actualized and vulnerable men are less savage men. The question is, does society need savage men?

I would argue savage men in your populace aren't needed. Until they are. Every revolution in history has hinged on savage men. And if history teaches us anything, it is that revolution is ALWAYS coming. Eventually. This is the paradox I observe as we unconditionally push for more emotionally intelligent men.

...but idk tho 🤷🏾‍♂️
Allen · 14w
It’s a disease. It’s called Gainz Ideology. It has resulted in the Great Financial Brain Drain.
Simon (2.₿y.2) Kofah profile picture
If restaurants billed like hospitals....

1. A menu item would cost X.

2. The value of X would be hidden from BOTH the server AND the guest.

3. The guest would then be charged some value Y (instead of X).

4. The restaurant would then be paid some value Z (instead of Y or X).

5. We, as a society, would then be downright BEWILDERED by how broken restaurant economics have become. Insanity 🤬
❤️1
snackblando · 15w
Interesting case, but this is unrelated to the gene editing itself. The problem is Roundup. This is a problem of capitalist system which does not really care who gets cancer, or in the case of private...
Simon (2.₿y.2) Kofah profile picture
Sure. In this case. I'm just pointing out the problem with unforeseen consequences. You are implying these ppl are good at anticipating consequences. I am suggesting they are abysmal at it. Therefore there should be no tinkering with the source code

Nature is the only proofreader I even marginally trust.
❤️1
snackblando · 15w
You would of course, run tests on what you created to see if it's harmful or not
Simon (2.₿y.2) Kofah profile picture
Familiar with Roundup? It's a highly toxic chemical that kills nearly anything it touches. Crops were "bioengineered" to be tolerant to roundup. Farmland was then saturated with Roundup, killing only the undesirable plants (weeds).

"Testing" the bioengineered crops would have revealed no problematic effects to the plant. But it turns out human consumption of Roundup is VERY harmful.... nature would have never produced a plant immune to Roundup. Gene editing did. Unfortunately the second/third order effects became apparent only after the practice was already mainstream.... this is a large contributor to America's food supply being toxic
1
snackblando · 15w
Interesting case, but this is unrelated to the gene editing itself. The problem is Roundup. This is a problem of capitalist system which does not really care who gets cancer, or in the case of private, for profit healthcare, even incentivizes more cancer - because a looooot of profit can be made cur...
snackblando · 15w
catastrophic how?
Simon (2.₿y.2) Kofah profile picture
If we assume gene X only controls one trait, but it turns out to control a lot of functions, we could introduce weird diseases or mutations by accident. When you selectively breed, you let evolved biological control mechanisms filter out potentially dangerous mututions

I don't trust profit-motivated corporations to tinker/optimize for bigger oranges and beefier cows without tolerating some possibly harmful tradeoffs. These are the ppl that brought us high fructose corn syrup. Given the means, they will ALWAYS want a "stickier" product..
1❤️1
snackblando · 15w
You would of course, run tests on what you created to see if it's harmful or not