latest

corona/Chlild Sacrifice.md

@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@
+*
 In a gesture of subservience, as one acts to offer the necessary cost for incurring a threat (even so little as an afternoon of discomfort), one meets a marvelous call to action, in the name of civility, through offering up the child. The state of the world could even be a fate worse than death, as it's thought that the suffering in the wild is palpably greater than those rare events which happened to someone else's child. As, you see, to leave it be would mean allowing an element of injustice alongside death already unescapable.
 
 The adult mind, with its layers of neurological noise, sports a clumsily constructed structure of symbolic memory (though amazing and sophisticated, we can thankfully always do better). Unable to look back, one has assimilated a propensity to reinforce their sacrifices already made - a demonstration of the sunk cost fallacy - coupled with an evolved sense to acknowledge some form of community tax.

corona/all_in_boomer.md

@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@
+*
 # The All-in Boomer
 
 One of the more horrendous images from this "era" is that of the unmasked adult guiding their young masked children about. That somehow they've managed to raise several of them and have them survive is a feat worth of some praise, particularly given the skewed proportions of risk which appears to be prevalent in their faculty of risk assessment.

new/Is_it_IQ_test.md

@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
+So, is it an IQ test? The things we do to prove our worth, yet do tehse things prove our value to ourselves? Do they cause us to find relief, or do they fuel the desire to seek unattainable fulfillment (and why would that be a bad thing)?
+
+In youth, we wanted nothing more from our elders tahn to be regarded as an equal, who can be left to pursue the world as we please, but this is only possible, or only appears to be possible, when we approach the world with the steps they would have us take. So do we take them? Well, no - not exactly.
+
+We can never produce the precise replica of their own visual representation of the form, structure, and transformations which they conceived of -> not unless we become their teacher and can take the reigns of their emotion -> instead, we produce what might seem flawed, but we dress it up and posture it as though it might be something even greater than anyone could have hoped for, and then spend an eternity following the path of that strange and folley-filled sputter of missteps that we hoped might get mistaken for genius.
+
+Then where lies the genius? In the folley? In the process of ridding ourselves of the erroneous desires? In our deception of ourselves?
+
+It may very well seem to be intelligent, but it can't be because it does not serve our fellow man. It doesn't serve humanity even in a superficially declarative way. It does not provide a great potential for verifiability. We might hope that this is possible in ways that are obvious to see, but the only means of seeking, that is, to look beneath the layers and contemplate how deep it goes - that is infinite, and the mind will always be ready to travel deeper and faster than the lips or fingers might be able to convey.
+
+It is easy to be fooled any which way, as there are both lazy and demanding approaches towards reaching and maintaining generally opposing positions. With one, we might say that it is easy to trust the experts that are most readily presented and say: "They can't possibly be that wrong, as too many high-profile and highly visible platforms are lending credence to these experts and their generally compatible viewpoints. This leads to some questions:
+
+1. Must they be committed in such a way that they can't recover from gracefully (if they turn out to be incorrect)
+2. Might it be a special circumstance whereby too many require the machine to continue chugging along, leading many to avoid presenting negative perspectives?
+

new/June_2021.md

@@ -108,4 +108,5 @@ Either one is fear mongering children into believing they are in grave danger wh
 
 We either have a message of the young sacrificing themselves for the old, or we have a message to fear that which should be the least fearful, which may oversensitize their fear in perpetuity.
 
-To be broken down into fearing the lowest possible risk might irreperably fracture the mind, though some won't even complain (I hear they're the resilient ones).
+To be broken down into fearing the lowest possible risk might irreperably fracture the mind, though some won't even complain (I hear they're the resilient ones).
+

new/ProgressiveAloof.md

@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+# Progressive Aloofness
+
+There might be a much better term for this, but it refers to the predisposition of the aristocratic or wannabe aristocratic academics, public servants and politican commentators to maintain strategic positions of plausible deniability, especially at the moment that the crux of the matter, elucidating the rationale for conflict of perspective, is presented to them.
+
+This is not a type of behaviour that need be partisan, and it should not be expected to take place among all sorts of people, but it is, in my opinion, more likely to be performed by the demographic in question, even in such instances where there is no public consequence.
+
+Why would this be?
+
+1. Fear
+2. Indoctratinion
+
+## Fear
+That perpetual motivation - we must even be thankful to learn from it, if even en route to ridding ourselves of it (there are better and more precise teachers). Progressive means socially progressive, and thus suggests that the person is not only supportive of, but also expectant of and personally interested in the growth of the state insofar that it is better able to provide expanding and social servces.
+
+There is a mindset which accompanies cheerleading for expanding state services, because it automatically expands the expectations of what humans are not expected to be personally accountable for. Yes, it is of benefit to have fewer people suffer needlessly, and there are some services which might not best be provided by a corporation, but increasing dependence on a system of behaviour which lends to decreased accountability or expectation of accountability, should be assumed to yield a misery of its own. Even all of these forms of rendering a service, or a right, to humans is done so ostensibly for the purpose of enabling a capacity or a resource which allows them to perform actions that they wish to perform.
+
+If we assume to know precisely what they want to perform, while also removing their ability to perform an action, or simply assuming that their capacity is not worthwhile, much work away from infection, but also that the capacity for symptoms.

new/Resilient_children.md

@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@
+*
 # Resilient, You Say
 
 They can tolerate increases above normal values.

new/SafetyRights.md

@@ -56,4 +56,12 @@ It is, in fact, a much more detailed and elaborate comparison and it requires ma
 ### Research
 Temporal scales matter. The amount of time we've been performing research indicates what things can be known and what things cannot be known.
 Ongoing research for blind spots of understanding is significant and indicates that we cannot understand the true nature of the risks for the treatment.
-Ongoing research necessary for the approval of a treatment is itself a massive red flag in the sense that its disregard is a code smell which suggests that the approval process is superfluous, as it's not demonstrated to be a necessary component to determining safety and use of the product. It begs the question of why there even needs to be an approval process, at all, or - at the very least, the approval process being sought for this particular therapy is likely to be erroneous and redundant.
+Ongoing research necessary for the approval of a treatment is itself a massive red flag in the sense that its disregard is a code smell which suggests that the approval process is superfluous, as it's not demonstrated to be a necessary component to determining safety and use of the product. It begs the question of why there even needs to be an approval process, at all, or - at the very least, the approval process being sought for this particular therapy is likely to be erroneous and redundant.
+
+The excuse for this is our emergency situation, but I don't think most reasonable people would assert that the handling is proportional, nor would it even be proportional had the treatment been available at the onset of the situation (the era, one might say). So what does this mean? Given that the response is so widespread, so highly politicized, and bearing aspects which cause reasonable people to question, to a remarkable degree, the logic of the decisions being made, one might be inclined to consider it prudent to wonder if the handling is indeed not proportional, and that the risk were not an emergency.
+
+Another factor worth mentioning is the fact that so many conclusions are drawn around particular concerns which take time to understand. The most obvious of these are those surrounding reproductive health. It has already been said, plenty of times, that one could not expect to have a clear understanding of the effects on a woman's reproductive capacity, capacity to breastfeed, and what the consequences of these things might be. But a more worths version of such a study would be one which compares multiple pregnancy periods of couples that have different configurations with respect to their status. It should reasonably be expected to take a plurality of cases, some of which are cases in sequence by the same people, and use this to make an informed decision.
+
+That being said, to conclude that the research has demonstrated safety, or that it has failed to demonstrate a lack of safety, for a particular cohort for whom repetition of a particular action, which itself cannot hav ebeen performed even one time, is necessary to be considered before having the capacity to assert a position or opinion, is a major red flag that the research itself has not been done.
+
+### Bias

new/Whims_and_lies.md

@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
+They change their methods at their whim, and then they claim they have proof of our mortal limitations which perfectly cinclude that we should have faith in them. You will be safer, but only if everyone else has followed suite and done the very same as you. Otherwise, you are not safe, nor are those who should have listened. If only they had the courage to undergo discomfort, or the intelligence necessary to be afraid.
+
+It's not that they are too stupid, but that they listen to persuaders, and they are still not exceptionally intelligent ( they are adequate, just not as high as one who does as I), such that they are able to defend themselves from trickery.
+
+Did we say "Lie with Statistics"? That was a joke, I promise. In fact, I only read it to make sure that I never lie and teach others not to as well. Of course, the real lie is to live a life helpless and unable, which is why I can use lesser lies in my uncovering of truth.
+
+# Persuasian
+
+Who is left to be persuaded? What do they need?
+
+Some have been complacent in ignoring aspects of the narrative coupled with suspicions brought on by their own good sense, all the while complying and expecting a timeline of normalcy that might, as an administrative nuissance, be delayed.
+
+They find, however, that as time goes on, the benefits of tehir compliance are not noticeable, and that the for mof resolution they had in their mind becomes increasingly difficult to specify, slurring into an indistinct blur that is the place o trickery -> a place where acts done for one reason have also been done for the pleasure of some entity.
+
+# Special Event
+That they haven't this ability, or haven't the proper and sufficient ability, then we are one acting with the intrinsic assumption that their own agency and direct expression needn't be an integral part of them performing actions which they truly want to perform. Like the embittered pearent who lives vicariously through their child, we cannot say that it is an act of altruism and benevolence.
+
+The question must be posed:
+Might these assumptions about others be made as a consequence, not of love, empathy and concern, but out of fear? Might som ebe afraid to live in a world where all the outliers are not made to be conforming to the norm? Where they haven't been given ample assurances that in the event of the most unpredictable of all actions will be controlled, and they will be given poorly described explanations and illustrations.
+
+Control is difficult, yes,

new/accountability_of_risk.md

@@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
+So, to summarize our little argument
+
+I am arguing that it's not a matter of asking people to take on risk, because they are already forcing others to take on risk. How are they doing this?
+
+How is it an explicit action of them forcing others to take on risk?
+Well, it's quite simple -> they are failing to perform the most reasonable action. It's reasonable, because they are being given all of the appropriate information, and that information indicates that the answer is really simple for them to deduce. Thus, if they do no deduce that answer, it's out of wilfull ignorance. Wilfull ignorance is not a sufficient excuse to claim that they are not responsible for the increased risk they have forced others to be subjected to, therefore there needs to be some degree of accountability.
+
+That accountability is going to be realized by forcing these individuals to be excluded from some aspects of society, so long as they truly have the opportunity to realize their mistakes, and this occurs through our dialogue. Furthermore, their exclusion from society is always improving their and other people's health. Since they are more vulnerable to disease, this helps to isolate them / socially distance them from others who, as we know, are either more protected, but still spreading, or aren't protected, and are liable to spread even more // TODO: nope

new/bodily_autonomy_vax.md

@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+# Bodily Autonomy
+*Vaccine Passports*
+
+## Claim:
+**The state should provide people with the means of proving their vaccine status, because of expectations being placed in them in countries where such proof is required for entry**
+
+## Questions to ask
+- Which countries
+- What could have been used thus far?
+- What is special about the new format which couldn't be provided previously?
+- How does this bring about harm?
+- What could be done in lieu of these passports
+