1- it contradicts the multiple-selves theory (which is based on science and backed by personal experience and observation.). You have your "good" self, your "private" self, your "evil" self, your "social" self, etc.
2- the human personality is subject to many variables to behave consistently across any given length of time (Bandura's formula). Same settings with a different music background and level of blood in our sugars might produce different outcomes.
3- the illusion of appearances: a person might appear as x but actually be y. I appear an extrovert but I am deeply introverted; it is not my fault that the people around me can't see it.
4- people are trainable. any set of traits and personality adjustments can be taught and trained under rigorous conditions. I became a dog person in 2021 even though for 30+ years my hair would stand on my back when the cutest puppy would appear in my social radius. Now I actively seek the most badass dogs others walk outside and pet them.
5- deep prejudicial and otherwise core personality traits are set in childhood, in the "parent ego state" and are not easy to remove or deprogram. These core traits stem from the millions of situations and interplay of various variables in childhood. labeling them into five neat categories is like classifying the plant world into five "basic" types of plants (which is totally unscientific) and naive.
Trying to persuade others you're a great developer by writing blogs is how some people I know got cushy positions as CTOs making obscene amounts of money and equity.
Never underestimate the power of marketing in our society. Fake till you make it is the motto.
good riddance. he was an uneducated idiot, who is indirectly responsible for the millions that were killed in Afghanistan, in 1992.
In 1989, when he pulled the red army out of Afghanistan--he also cut all aid to the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan. the then-president of DRA went to Moscow to persuade Garbageoff to not to do so, predicting that the terrorist zealots would overrun his government leading to chaos in the region.
Garbageoff dismissed him, and did not even go to the airport to receive him. In the ensuing two years, the DRA fought the terrorists to the last bullet, until food became scarce and defenses crumbled. The terrorists entered Kabul and began fighting each other (they were self-labeling themselves "Mujahedeen" then).
In the carnage that followed, Kabul was destroyed, millions died and became refugees. I was an 11-yo boy who witnessed my neighbors getting torn to pieces by the rockets fired by the terrorists. I barely survived the rockets myself, and we fled and became refugees in Pakistan.
Not to dimish your experience in any way, there are only a few things tgat are worse than that. Blaming all of it on Gorbatshev is too easy so. We cannot forget the US meddling in Afghan affairs, nor the fact the long term intervention of the West led to similar results. Nor wad the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan very kind on the Afghan people in general.
Well, since today we hear about Garbageoff, so I discussed my opinion from THIS side of things. For sure, many other "players" are also to blame for a lot of the mess my people have found themselves in.
Which makes absolute sense. Gorbachev is held in such high regard in the West, rightly so IMHO, that it is easy to ignore and forget the other points of view.
it's you again, the "committee" man. actually, since Garbageoff did not do well in school and he was admitted to the universities in Leningrad on the strength of a medal he had won that was given to him based on the large amount of crops he had harvested (he was a "machinist"). There he wrote to his family members that the studies were "grueling", meaning he merely winged it and because he was not cut out for education, he was sent back to his village to do more of crop-harvesting.
So yeah, he did go to school but he was not what you call truly educated (just like other self-important, arrogant people suffering from Dunning-Kruger effect). That he was an idiot can also be seen from his posing in advertisements while his countrymen were starving in the long lines for bread--something unthinkable during any USSR year.
It is easy for you to judge not having experienced the cruelty of the war and communisism and central-planning. He saw a problem and lead people to fix it.
it is easy for you to speak for me, not having experienced war and famine directly. Also, on that Russian score you are wrong: after what he did, the ex-USSR population suffered devastating poverty. And you have the cheek to defend him. Are you a troll?
No, after what he did Russia and the eastern bloc were more prosperous in the 90s than they were in the 80s. I do not recall bread lines and famine in former USSR countries in the 90s. I didn't know he required defending all that money that went into an arms race went back to the people, the greatness and pompous image of the soviet union ended,that's about it. Nostalgia is deceptive, USSR in the 80s was not better off than 90s.
Westerners benefited directly from the downfall of the USSR. Gorbachev prolonged the American liberal world order at the expense of his people, to the West that makes him a great hero
So you put all of that on just a single person - Gorbachev?
How about Nur Muhammad Taraki and Hafizullah Amin, two Afghans? The Soviets only sent troops after multiple requests by Prime Minister Hafizullah Amin and President Nur Mohammad Taraki. Do they not share proportionate responsibility?
If that were truly the case, the red army should not have entered Afghanistan in the first place and kept their little claws to themselves. Now that they entered and created chaos and conditions for civil war, it was on them to clean up the mess.
Moreover, red army was not really shedding all that much blood. They were sending Afghan army to the dangerous fronts--basically to die (my father was one and he told me how the Russians sent them off to an ambush. When the Afghan army halted because they knew they were gonna die, the Russians began shelling them in order to push them forward.).
In any case, the problems were created by Russians and it became their responsibility to fix it. Moreover, they had agreements and treaties and Garbageoff reneged on those.
To the little boy who lost his childhood and future because of his strategic stupidity he is guilty of deceit, incompetence and inhumanity and I will not stop praying that he continues to burn in hell for it.
why are you all so hell-bent on glorifying Popper (pooper). He was just a moron with an agenda.
Btw, tolerance, like democracy is just a bulls$##t concept. Would you like to be tolerant of the neo-trans man going to the same toilet as your teenage daughters???
answer me: would you be comfortable if a MAN who says he thinks he is a woman went to the same toilet as your teenage daughters!? cowards downvote, if you are right, come debate me.
wow, they have downvoted your comment--but you did not belittle anyone, nor is your comment irrelevant. Hey, HN, must we all write what you like or can we have our own original thoughts? why you so afraid of debates? if he is wrong, prove him wrong (I think he is wrong, btw), why do you downvote his answer? that's pathetic and so 1984.
I don't think it does. Being an atheist, you display your fine intellect for all other readers to see. 2b is a logical outcome for me, and if you think sth is wrong with it, you are implying that an atheist reads scientific works that he does not understand! ...
that explains the fairy tales called big Bang, Natural Selection, and other assorted amusements.
If you atheists were indeed smart you would not have felt so hurt and downvote my original comment. Also, IQ tests are rubbish (and you didn't know that--which shows your intelligence level).
Among us, we look down on any work that is written by an atheist. It is the ultimate mark of low intelligence.
it is the WE that does not care for the works of an atheist because of the fundamental intelligence flaw. If YOU do, then by all means, sate your thirst for second-rate knowledge. I'd rather stand with the likes of Descartes and Leibnitz, minds vastly greater than any modern atheist's.
anyone who does not have and practice a standard code of morality does not earn my respect, and should not feel hurt if I don't read their books... I am free in my choice as are atheists. I simply said I don't read their books because they are not clever. They are welcome to say to same about me.
anyone in that original list of mine has deficient intelligence levels. you need an elementary analysis to see that it is so--there is nothing subjective about logic.
are we? Your history of computing begins with Turing????? Turing--with generous help from the British military--merely followed up and finished (in effect stole and took credit for) what Babbage started and conceived but could not finish due to no financial or governmental support in his time (btw Babbage was no atheist). Turing was merely a functionally normal.
There is a difference between a functionally normal atheist (like Turing) and a genius theist like Descartes. When I say deficient--it is in this relative term. The atheist is merely functionally normal but in objective terms, still deficient. It is not atheism that leads to that, but the underlying low level of intelligence that leads to atheism. Fortunately, there's hope: the underlying low level is ARTIFICIALLY-induced. In other words, the human brain is capable of achieving higher intelligence levels even if it has been stuck in low levels for a long time.
Functional normality is being just intelligent enough to pull off the type of tasks that given training, both computers and chimpanzees could do--the functionally normal person is somewhere in between. The difference being, as I stated in my second paragraph, that with humans, you can go beyond and remove the artificial barrier to higher level of intelligence.
Ask any former atheist and they will be glad to tell you how they fully self-actualized and became smarter beyond their wildest dreams.
I’m probably being facetious but I’m guessing whatever his religion is.
Based on his other comments, he’s not worth a discussion with. To dismiss someone’s ideas based on someone’s belief system is the sign of closed-mindedness. And I say that for both religious and atheistic people.
feelings are there for a reason.
ignoring them means going against your own nature.
going against nature has serious ramifications down the line.
journos are not qualified to peddle out psychiatric advice.
1- it contradicts the multiple-selves theory (which is based on science and backed by personal experience and observation.). You have your "good" self, your "private" self, your "evil" self, your "social" self, etc.
2- the human personality is subject to many variables to behave consistently across any given length of time (Bandura's formula). Same settings with a different music background and level of blood in our sugars might produce different outcomes.
3- the illusion of appearances: a person might appear as x but actually be y. I appear an extrovert but I am deeply introverted; it is not my fault that the people around me can't see it.
4- people are trainable. any set of traits and personality adjustments can be taught and trained under rigorous conditions. I became a dog person in 2021 even though for 30+ years my hair would stand on my back when the cutest puppy would appear in my social radius. Now I actively seek the most badass dogs others walk outside and pet them.
5- deep prejudicial and otherwise core personality traits are set in childhood, in the "parent ego state" and are not easy to remove or deprogram. These core traits stem from the millions of situations and interplay of various variables in childhood. labeling them into five neat categories is like classifying the plant world into five "basic" types of plants (which is totally unscientific) and naive.