Welcome to INTJ Forum

This is a community where INTJs can meet others with similar personalities and discuss a wide variety of both serious and casual topics. If you aren't an INTJ, you're welcome to join anyway if you would like to learn more about this personality type or participate in our discussions. Registration is free and will allow you to post messages, see hidden subforums, customize your account and use other features only available to our members.


Core Member
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About RBM

  • Rank
    Core Member


  • MBTI
  • Enneagram
  • Global 5/SLOAN
  • Astrology Sign
    Leo, w/Libra
  • Personal DNA
  • Brain Dominance


  • Biography
    Student of Life, old fart. post alcohol/cancer
  • Location
    Lincoln NE
  • Occupation
  • Interests
    Theory of Everything, Oil/Energy, Technology in general, PC's specifically
  • Gender
  • Personal Text
    My own suspicion is that the Universe is not only queerer than we suppose, but queerer than we can suppose. - J. B. S. Haldane
  1. The only people that need piles of seasonings are those who have abused their taste buds for so long with so many unnatural elements (think processed food chemicals) that their threshold for tasting anything is sky high. I'm experimenting with diet choices for about 5 years now, which has me leaning toward vegetarian/vegan choices. That diet trend has really sensitized my taste buds, so seasonings are in minimal use in my diet.
  2. So don't. That's a perfect strategy, now plan the execution to achieve that strategy.
  3. What's 'evil' about this ?
  4. "The thought experiment proposes a world in which all human beings are treated as ends (meaning treated as if they and their well-being are the goal), not as means to an end for other people." - Wikipedia We seem, in the Species sense, to have a long way to go to get to treating others as 'ends'.
  5. Nice post. The OP is obviously only operating on an intellect, and ignoring the rest of his BEING to interact.
  6. If this utility is only about you, it's a quintessential self-centered statement. If the statement is about Others, then it's not about you. Others who can benefit from your behavior of utility toward them, is a step toward Evolution, in the broadest sense. ...... added to this post 2 minutes later: That's merely ONE reason. There are tons and tons more reasons.
  7. 'Don't do evil' vs 'Do good' As commenters have pointed out, good needs a definition to be effective. This point is argued without a definition, by some, including the OP("Anyone who discusses costs and trivial concepts like worthwhile are ignorant, and are derailing the discussion."), but the Forum has it's own culture determined by mods and admin, and will act according to there perceived agenda. The philosophy of Consequentialism: As one can see, assuming one acknowledges Free Will, this is a failed doctrine because one doesn't have certain types of control(in this case what is posted to the forum, for example), to determine others behavior by which consequences can be judged. Lots of alternatives to consequentialism are available.
  8. This attraction is because you have lesson's to learn about how you act toward the 'weird god damn people'. They are mirrors for you to see how you act. This attraction will stop when you learn the lesson's that they teach you. If you are clueless about how to act, pay attention when you interact with them. See how you act. Then, later, think about how you acted. The family member is likely a related lesson to learn, like above. This existence is all about lesson's to learn.
  9. As a US citizen, I've always wondered how the US gets away with this ? I can't come up with any sensible reason. Only greedy ones.
  10. Bang with the Big Hammer on that nail ! Yup, you put it succinctly. ...... added to this post 5 minutes later: As if that case is sufficient in conceptualizing a definition. Even 'for the sake of argument' I'd say it's an extremely sloppy definition. The sensory modes are what are considered the so-called criteria for what is physical and what isn't. ...... added to this post 30 minutes later: That's well stated. All interpretations come down to placement of what is fundamental to reality and what is derivative in reality. Human history follows a the same basic trajectory as evolution, in a broad sense, does. So we, Species-wide are at the point of philosophical materialism or a similar 'flavor', so to speak. Of course there are outliers, and that's generally where the next theory comes from. I'm from the school that places Consciousness as fundamental, which is a highly complex model. The Everett interpretation fail, spectacularly, at parsimony. Which important for those who are serious about the topic, like I am. Have you watched any of the Youtubes on the Simulation Hypothesis ? If not, I'd recommend the one by Fair Wind Films.
  11. In the South US ? Which is generally socially conservative, as in 'rah! rah! Status Quo'.
  12. Meh, Chalmers is old news. I'll wait around for anyone else to point out inconsistencies. Are you studied-up on the Double-Slit experiments, by chance ?
  13. Most certainly SPECIFIC kinds of Fear have survivability value for the group to continue to evolving. BUT, we have much, much, much more pervasive, and 'off-topic', so to speak, now, then evolutionary valuable Fears.
  14. And there's no logical evidence available to suggest the evolution is going to stop. We might well evolve to non-omnivores.
  15. Resistance to what is required for growth ? The best fill-in-the-blank I can come up with is > resistance to the status quo. That's the only answer I see that full embodies change that is always afoot.