If you don't appreciate "the birth of tragedy" (Nietzsche), perhaps you should try the tragedy of birth (Cioran).

Edit 2: so as for what we should do about North Korea, absolutely nothing. Everything works out better that way for everyone. — Dogar

North Korea owes a lot to the Bee Gees...

There are no young Hegelians here. The spirit of the salon is further from Max Stirner than from Jessica Fletcher ... thankfully.

I would recommend Plato's Meno, the text in which he went from being an author of manners and committing suicide to the skeptic he had been until then. Or The Sophist, where he dismisses almost everything that he previously thought, including the positive assessment of Socrates.
The second book that attracts me the most is Categories by Aristotle. I had the opportunity to have an old teacher of mine use it as a text to teach us how to translate Greek. It was an exciting experience, although it emptied the classroom.
A third text is Kant's Critique of Judgment, where he tries to correct himself. It is a text in which I always discover something new and it makes me feel quite an idiot. It is good for me to remember that I am not as smart as I am sometimes led to believe.

[...]

Camus doesn't matter. The relevant one is Jean Genet. Life is not a pleasure, but suicide consists of a low level of serotonin in the nervous system. You will live it as you see fit, but on a neurological level it is what it is. You has a very simple point of view on the "underdeveloped" world. Since the 1990s, in Southeast Asia the world of yesterday (underdeveloped) is considered to be in Europe and the United States. In any case, you are more likely to commit suicide in Japan, Sweden or Canada than in a shitty country. The Jews wanted to survive in the hell of the concentration camps with one idea fixed in their minds: revenge.

I think that is the simplest solution. Congratulations.

I am an atheist by the grace of God and He told me one day that puppies, ballerinas and ice creams exist, but that He does not exist.

I think empirical and cultural anthropology are scientific. The first is a type of paleontology and the second studies and observes current societies. However, history, as reality, does not exist. And as a discourse it is a type of narrative.

The one-child policy was implemented in China.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-child_policy
75% of the population agreed with her. In an overcrowded country, it seemed the most ideal, although in the case of China, sometimes two million people were eliminated to balance the statistics and nobody says anything.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_China
*******************
The idea belongs Thanos (Thank you, Marvel). Without every two people having only one child, the Earth would be more sustainable. What I don't believe in is "sustainable development". If it is development it is not sustainable and if it is sustainable, then it is not development.

Each couple should have only one child at most.


Un saludo Javier, de otro español.

Every problem does have a solution. Its just that some people prefer to live with the problem rather than the solution, which is a solution (decision) in itself. — Harry Hindu

When in 1980 the super-rich decided to get their money out of the American economy, deindustrializing the country and sending their factories where wages and environmental regulations are a joke, major north-american cities became hollowed-out helmets of an industrial past that was once glorious, synonymous with decline. Think Detroit, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Milwaukee, Buffalo, Toledo, and more. Tens of millions of white workers in working-class factories were out of work, losing their high-paying jobs forever. Have they chosen to live with your problems? What are their chances of solving their problems?

The reality is very complex. The problems faced by millions of people are not created or solved by themselves.

Rationalism in politics is nonsense. All rationalists believe that any problem can be understood and has a solution. Great nonsense. You don't give credit to practical experience that does not depend on reason, but on time, sensitivity, and a long relationship with complex customs that work in reality. For cooking, playing poker, or competing in lovemaking, there is no theoretical program or knowledge to replace practical experience. If you want to cook badly, lose at poker, or ruin your love story, consult a manual or follow the steps in a biology treatise or on a computer. If you wish the love of a woman and you believe in Darwin, what a shock awaits you, friend.

Computers are illogical. Who determines what information is relevant? The programmer, not the machine. A computer is a fast fool. Let's try not to be slow fools.

I have always thought that the second commandment (Ex 20, 7; Dt 5, 11) should be rigorously applied, because whoever talks about Him apparently wants to talk about Him, but only wants to talk about himself. The simplest sentiment about religion will always be much better than the most complex reasoning.
And Snoopy is wonderful.

God is Dog backwards. And everybody adores Snoopy. it is so cute...

The illusion of being ruled by machines is seductive by the principle of equality. It seems like a way to ensure that the law applies equally to everyone. Great, huh? But if the best government is that of the machines, perhaps only they should vote. This we may not like so much.

Everyone believes that they derive their values from Plato, Saint Thomas or Kant. However, humanity is surrendered to Ponzi.

Why?

The definition of a prime number is Pythagorean. For the Pythagoreans the number 1 was not even, nor odd, but even-odd. It was the number that was "outside" the numbering system. That is why in the definition of prime it is not introduced as an element of primality. Nor is 0 used, by the way. By dividing it by itself, we get an indeterminacy. However, the Pythagoreans did not have a concept of 0 and, therefore, it is not included in the definition of a prime number, just as we do not introduce irrational numbers.

I insist: "Martha and Mary are sisters. Marta has two nieces who are not Mary's nieces. It's possible?"

-Do you accept Mary in health and in sickness, in wealth and poverty until death do you part?
-Yes, no, yes, no, no.

Eternal life lasts a little while.

Marta and María are sisters. Marta has two nieces who are not Maria's nieces. It's possible?

You don't know what friendship is.

When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.' Groucho Marx.
If you have a good friend, you don't need to ask about the meaning of life...

If happiness results in sadness, why be happy? — synthesis

Happiness is what explains what motivates you to wake up and get up every day. It is the light of a lighthouse. If you don't see that light and you don't aspire for it to enlighten you, you won't mind being alive or dead.

"Why do human interactions on the internet tend to skew negative, as opposed to positive? What does this say about human behaviour?" — GLEN willows

- Out of desire to change roles. We pretend to be who we are not. We would wish we were less diplomatic. The Internet makes up for our frustrations.
- Like a game. We like to say things that we do not feel, simply because they are part of the possible discourse.
- As self-affirmation. We want to impress others, by leaving the usual anonymity to which we are condemned.
- By shared idiocy. There is too much fool in the world. Every idiot in the world is not willing to pass in silence while the world praising people who have proven to be talented. A Confederacy of Dunces, bro.

************************
Conclusion: At thirty, everyone bites. Especially in the savannah.

The problem is that you can only speak clearly about first-order logic. Most of the propositions of the same "Tractatus" are meaningless applying that own criteria.

Killing you is a bad option. Think of the bad people who will smile and say: we already knew he was a freak, a coward, etc. Fuck them.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

One might think that after the past several millennia of authoritarian control that people would be universally ready to be free, but not so much. As it turns out, most want mommy and daddy to tell them what to do. — synthesis

You keep thinking in terms of the Condorcet conjecture: that all human beings "are" the same. The "people" do not exist. If we take Plato's model, there are intelligent people who, as governed, will make the Kantian slogan their own: "sapere aude". They will follow a ruler like Roosevelt, but not his successors in office. Others have the guardian mentality and will therefore trust whatever government guarantees them their privileges. It is the mentality of the officers. Finally, there are those who think like peasants, for whom there is only a small plot and that is why they kill or die. The peasants always feel like victims. All fascist leaders present themselves as victims, so rural areas will always vote for them. [Hitler never won in Berlin; he hated that circumstance so much that he planned to dynamite the city and build on its ashes the world capital of the future: Germania]. In this sense, the turn towards the extreme right of the Republican Party is very revealing, which has decentered the Democratic Party to the point of occupying the space left by it. Freeman has described the phenomenon quite well: "The Republican Party has become the party of victims ... Everywhere you look, Republicans masquerade as victims. Trump became a victim on his first day in office when attacked the press for correcting his easily demonstrable lie that the size of the crowd that attended the inauguration was the largest of all. Naming the press as "enemy of the people" enshrined its victim status in a central institution of the American society: the media. "

https://www.commondreams.org/views/2021/01/06/republican-party-and-victimhood-ideology

Sorry, but two scientific theories do not have to be consistent with each other. For example, the theories of the end of the universe: Big Rip, Bir Crunch or Big Freeze.
Leibniz already said it. I suppose that philosophy meant a lot to the last wise man capable of innovating in everything (except geography)

An exercise for a philosophy class is like playing against a chess player who has just learned the rules. The game quickly turns into mutual nonsense.

The Department of the Treasury disagrees. They know what you think and you better do what you must.

Weimar Republic. The SA stormed the Reichstag, took Berlin, and put Hitler in power. (Uuuups... a Godwin!)

I think that your question makes sense if you believe Condorcet's conjecture: that all human beings "are" the same. As soon as we add a few more variables, the question blurs. Suppose Plato's hypothesis: in every society there are three castes. The sages have as their goal the preservation of the state (that is, their good and that of others). Guardians are meant to preserve their caste at the expense of the peasants. And each peasant thinks only of himself. They are not interested in the good of the State, nor in the other peasants.
A party is like a bus. There are people who go up and down continuously. According to Condorcet, the population of the bus is always the same. Plato adds some more complexity. The critical mass of a party depends on the ruling caste: sages, guardians or peasants. The Republican Party of the Trump era is a bus full of peasants. However, that does not define the Republican Party. The Democratic Party of the 1930s was a busload of wise men. Roosevelt politics was to the left of Bernie Sanders: "He put tens of millions of people to work through “alphabetical agencies” such as the Civilian Conservation Corps, the National Industrial Recovery Act, and the Works Progress Administration. He imposed FDIC requirements on banks and insured investor’ deposits. He separated commercial banking from investment banking and created unemployment insurance and Social Security."
I think your question makes sense as long as it doesn't deviate from Condorcet's speech.

You should read Robert Freeman:
https://www.commondreams.org/views/2020/11/30/economy-isnt-working-thats-exactly-plan

I was married by a judge... I should have asked for a jury. – Groucho Marx

Einstein: The distinction between the past, present and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion.