At first I thought 5 orders of magnitude, but 10,000x is way off. The closest I can reckon is they mean “magnified 100% five times”, i.e. 2⁵, or 32x, which seems like it could be right.
At first I thought 5 orders of magnitude, but 10,000x is way off. The closest I can reckon is they mean “magnified 100% five times”, i.e. 2⁵, or 32x, which seems like it could be right.
Probably that trigonometry is the highest math the average person will take?
I would imagine the FSM to be composed of the platonic ideal of gluten rather than physical gluten, though I’m not sure if that would be more irritating or less. I’d consult a GI and maybe a metaphysician.
It’s complicated.
As elsewhere stated, outward tranquility doesn’t necessarily indicate internal state. And even still, it is possible to exert some control over your emotions, it’s a skill that gets more effective with practice.
I myself am a fairly tranquil person. This is likely precisely because of very non tranquil conditions growing up. I’d wager this is the case for most counterintuitively calm people. You learn not to succumb to the initial stress response of panic or anger: take a breath, look at your situation calmly, determine an effective course of action, execute that course of action calmly and deliberately. Anger clouds your judgement, encourages you to make rash decisions. Whatever your problem, tranquility helps you to solve it cleanly without creating new problems.
Additionally, as your empathy grows, you have less and less anger towards individuals, as you recognize their transgressions are themselves symptoms of their own panic and anger. It’s hard to be angry at scared, lost, and lonely people clutching at ideologies designed explicitly to prey on their insecurities.
I think it’s best portrayed in The Invisibles where, after spending the entirety of the story building up an epic ideological war between the forces of authoritarianism and freedom, we’re told “We lied. We are not at war. There is no enemy. This is a rescue operation.” Daryl Davis fights intolerance without anger towards his potential converts.
So what does that leave us? Righteous anger at abstract ideologies and systems that ensnare insecure people into a web of hatred and vitriol. But anger isn’t useful against abstract ideologies and systems, they are cold and emotionless. Some might claim it is, but they’re conflating anger with resolve; anger can help maintain resolve, but it isn’t necessary. It is quite possible to be tranquil and resolutely opposed to tyrannical and hateful ideology. Personally, I think it’s more effective than visibly brimming with rage.
Is any animal perfectly bilaterally symmetrical?
Not immediately no, but I like to at least entertain the most charitable explanation when so little information is given.
Well, if she attacked him first it would be self-defense
“F”
Grab a bag of vowels and follow your heart
See if you qualify for any down payment assistance programs. Combined with an FHA loan, you could possibly get into a house with under $5k.
Bet you read that in a textbook
I tried real hard, but I got born into lower middle class by mistake. My bad, I should’ve tugged harder on my bootstraps while I was an incorporeal potentiality.
I block a lot of instances because they’re specific to interests I don’t care about. I’ve blocked 2 particularly obstinate users.
I was in my university’s Society of Physics Students, and some of the members got to have dinner with NDT after a talk he gave at the school. Reports confirm he is a self-centered, arrogant douchebag
I’ve only heard it as a “hardcore” term
I use it for generating illustrations and NPCs for my TTRPG campaign, at which it excels. I’m not going to pay out the nose for an image that will be referenced for an hour or two.
I also use it for first drafts (resume, emails, stuff like that) as well as brainstorming and basic Google tier questions. Great jumping off point.
An iterative approach works best for me, refining results until they match what I’m looking for, then manually refining further until I’m happy with the results.
Notice the top comment compared belief in god specifically to flat earth theory, hence the structure of my response.
As to your hypothesis, I didn’t ask about brain activity, I asked about consciousness itself, the subjective experience. It’s still very much an open question.
Attention isn’t eliminated by smartphones, just shortened
Once upon a time people argued penmanship was crucial to building a well developed brain. Same with memorizing epics by rote. Books were actually considered bad for students because they would become dull and lazy if they did not commit all their knowledge to memory.
But memory can largely be replaced by technology, and that enables access to more knowledge than one person could ever memorize. Who knows how society will develop, for better or worse.
On the one hand, the grumpy old man in me agrees completely.
On the other, they’ve been saying this for all of history, since that new-fangled writing wreaked havoc on our ancestors’ children’s memories. And it did in fact do that, but we changed.
Attention span is just going to become vestigial in the general population as it becomes less necessary in an evolving technological and sociological environment, just like memory and penmanship.
That’s mental