Recent content by Joonas

The scale of good and evil doesn't take actions themselves into account, it only needs to look at the stuff that goes on inside your head to determine your level of good. And no matter how much you try to hide your evil actions from yourself, the scale of good and evil will see through such...

Hmm. I don't see the correlation between freedom of speech and copyright or trademark legislation. If that's all that they are going to censor, then this would be a good thing. If they use their censoring capabilities for things this vote doesn't bring to our attention, then it would be a bad...

I find that doing a nice thing to someone while being watched feels really awkward, especially if it isn't expected. Is that normal/understandable? I'm basically manipulating people to think that I'm not interested in their well being to avoid the awkward feeling, and I haven't been able to...

You have a very low threshold for negative things. It's like saying that the sea can't be regarded as pure anymore because you managed to find one salt particle from it after searching through 99,9% of the whole sea without finding anything until that one salt particle. The fact is that the...

This fact seems to only be about the hardware though, so in a situation with no outside interference, it takes the brain 12 minutes at most to sort things out (according to this fact). The only way I can see them test this out is through animals because they aren't as aware as humans are and...

Yes, and as far as I've noticed, animals have the same emotions as humans do, although it varies from animal to animal. I suppose they got the 12 minutes from studying animals with similar brains to ours or something.

Yep.

Did you mean me? Probably not, but I've been meaning to ask for some advice regarding what type I fit best into, and I know that I do not act like other ENFP's do. It's just that I looked at some videos of them and I could see myself acting like that if I were 10. I've always been scored as...

I wasn't going into that direction. I meant that we're able to make up an entire universe if we so wish (by writing one), and therefore we're also capable of saying how things really are in that universe. If we're able to do that, then somebody can do it to our universe as well, for example...

When you read a book and in the creator's notes it states that the main character is actually of the opposite gender than what's depicted inside the story, are you going to ask the creator "How do you know?!"? No you aren't, it's obvious that the writer has the last say about what's what inside...

So would it be fine if I didn't use adjectives or well known objects then? They do not make a difference to begin with, so that's fine with me. Something exists and everyone observes it either accurately or inaccurately. In my previous example, everyone observed it inaccurately. What I mean is...

I don't think that the problem is in defining the universe, just in our way of looking at it. You seem to be a relativist that thinks about everything according to how you, anyone or anything is able to perceive it as, while I believe in absolutes. If a car is gray (in reality), and I perceive...

The universe isn't a part of your conciousness and your conciousness has nothing to do with what the universe actually is. And for something to be observed, it has to exist first.

Is this about completely dismissing stereotypes, or about not locking into stereotypes but still using them just as much as anyone else? Like, would a personist feel threathened if he saw a shark swimming near him, even though the shark had yet to actually show any interest in him (ideally)?

That's a relief! Hmm, I use forums for a different purpose than chatting, mainly for figuring out answers etc. I'm definitely not the outgoing type while on the internet.