If Mort Divine ruled the world

[CiG]

I am.

 

[The Ozzman]

Just heard about the bomb thing. Some are saying that it was apparently an obvious fake, though the speculation of whether it was a right-winger sending a message, a left-winger sending a false flag, or a right-winger sending an obvious false flag to discredit left-wingers is pretty hilarious. I half-hope that it was a right-winger trolling the media that gets away with it.

>No canceled stamps (USPS ink stamp indicating they accepted the amount of postage applied)
>Not enough postage to even send the damn thing

Even if it did get into the postal system, typically anything above a certain weight that is merely 'stamped' with something like forever stamps will get returned as 'anonymous mail' to prevent this from happening. It happened to me when I sent someone a bunch of CDs. They want you go to to an actuall post office and send that way.

Complete false flag

 

[rms]

only one that i heard was fake was maxine waters, was soros/clintons non-existent as well?

 

[The Ozzman]

only one that i heard was fake was maxine waters, was soros/clintons non-existent as well?

I believe the Soros one was actually detonated by the bomb squad but other than that I'm not sure.

 

[Vegard Pompey]

So that guy who's been editing together those Jordan B. Peterson parody videos apparently lost his job because of it.

Or so he claims. Could be a fabricated story to make Patreon money. It's a little implausible (became a skilled video editor in 2 weeks?) but not impossible.

 

[CiG]

Those parody videos don't exactly glorify the man or his views. Often they actually lampoon his verbosity and his tendency to waffle, if he got fired for that that's pretty fucking ridiculous.

 

[Dak]

False dilemma.

People don't need rational motives to pull this shit... so why not engage in these activities right before midterms?

The fact that there's plenty of not-right-before-an-election time, and that the targets were all politically involved, in one form or the other, suggests that there's at least some rationality in the propagating of the events.

 

[Einherjar86]

OR... the timing means nothing because we're talking about a person (or persons) who's irrational enough to send reportedly potential, if flawed, explosive devices in the mail.

 

[Dak]

OR... the timing means nothing because we're talking about a person (or persons) who's irrational enough to send reportedly potential, if flawed, explosive devices in the mail.

Mail bombs are inherently irrational?

 

[TechnicalBarbarity]

http://www.metalinjection.net/lates...55SHK33hQ_onx78-HAI0mARbmn5mIThDQoNFZwFweo11c

 

[Krow]

http://www.metalinjection.net/lates...55SHK33hQ_onx78-HAI0mARbmn5mIThDQoNFZwFweo11c

Damn Absu broke up because of that man-cunt

 

[The Ozzman]

Nothing of value was lost

 

[CiG]

Soy Injection are terrible.

 

[Dak]

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/dec/22/psa-encourages-kids-to-steal-parents-guns-hand-ove/

Sleeper 13 Productions released the controversial video on Dec. 13. It shows a pouty, young boy wandering into his parents’ bedroom, stealing a handgun out of their dresser drawer and then shoving it into his backpack.

The boy then carries what is presumably a loaded weapon into his classroom. After class, he approaches the teacher, takes the gun out of his backpack and slams it onto her desk.

“Can you take this away? I don’t feel safe with a gun in my house,” the boy says.

“Our children deserve a safe world,” the ad says. “Stop gun violence now.”

I can't imagine any potential problems following this PSA recommendation.

 

[Einherjar86]

Mail bombs are inherently irrational?

Not inherently in the metaphysical sense that nothing's inherent...

But given that we're a global community of human beings with, generally speaking, comparable empathetic responses and attitudes toward acceptable behavior... yes, mail bombs are "inherently" irrational.

Now, narrowing the scope further:

Given that we're talking about America, in which the purpose of sending mail bombs seems to be one of three possibilities--genuine harm, false flagging, or trolling--yes, all three are certainly irrational.

And if we're dealing with an irrational person, then I'm no longer convinced by any fallacious appeals to circumstantial and/or coincidental details. Even if you end up being right--and I stress this point--your reasoning is still shit.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Since when does conformity to some biological consensus imply rationality? The irrational (M-W: not logical or reasonable) aspect is that most/all of the bombs have been complete duds with no chance of working, from what I've heard so far. The would-be bomber may have a 70 IQ and think that a pipe attached to wires and a clock will magically create an explosive, which would imply irrationality since he performed an action with no chance of it meeting his goal. If his goal was to troll the media, it seems like his plan worked well, and was rationally conceived.

 

[Dak]

Not inherently in the metaphysical sense that nothing's inherent...

But given that we're a global community of human beings with, generally speaking, comparable empathetic responses and attitudes toward acceptable behavior... yes, mail bombs are "inherently" irrational.

Now, narrowing the scope further:

Given that we're talking about America, in which the purpose of sending mail bombs seems to be one of three possibilities--genuine harm, false flagging, or trolling--yes, all three are certainly irrational.

And if we're dealing with an irrational person, then I'm no longer convinced by any fallacious appeals to circumstantial and/or coincidental details. Even if you end up being right--and I stress this point--your reasoning is still shit.

I really don't know where you obtained or alternately how you independently generated this conception of rationality. As HBB noted, rationality is logical processes. There is psych research asserting the primacy of goals as orienting to behavior. In this understanding, the only way we can determine whether or not mail bombs are an irrational behavior is if they do not have any logical argument towards achieving desired goals of the maker/sender.

Edit: It would appear you're arguing that "abnormal" behavior is irrational. That's a terrible definition.

 

[Dak]

Separate news, according to available statistics, LGBT persons are 200-400% over-represented in the media.

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-...-characters-at-record-high-on-tv-report-finds

https://www.statista.com/topics/1249/homosexuality/
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/01/health/transgender-population.html

Unfortunately "bi" is such a vague category there's no good data on it.

 

[Einherjar86]

Since when does conformity to some biological consensus imply rationality? The irrational (M-W: not logical or reasonable) aspect is that most/all of the bombs have been complete duds with no chance of working, from what I've heard so far. The would-be bomber may have a 70 IQ and think that a pipe attached to wires and a clock will magically create an explosive, which would imply irrationality since he performed an action with no chance of it meeting his goal. If his goal was to troll the media, it seems like his plan worked well, and was rationally conceived.

Not when you consider the potential consequences, which could be achieved as easily through legal means.

Rationality isn't the same as logic. Rationality deals in the quality of outcomes, i.e. better or worse. Logic has nothing to do with better or worse. A decision can be illogical but rational.

I really don't know where you obtained or alternately how you independently generated this conception of rationality. As HBB noted, rationality is logical processes. There is psych research asserting the primacy of goals as orienting to behavior. In this understanding, the only way we can determine whether or not mail bombs are an irrational behavior is if they do not have any logical argument towards achieving desired goals of the maker/sender.

Edit: It would appear you're arguing that "abnormal" behavior is irrational. That's a terrible definition.

That's not what I'm saying.

EDIT: and besides, you argue for correspondence between normality and rationality in virtually your every waking breath.

 

[Dak]

Not when you consider the potential consequences, which could be achieved as easily through legal means.

That's not what I'm saying.

EDIT: and besides, you argue for correspondence between normality and rationality in virtually your every waking breath.

Is the goal to achieve x end and not be arrested? We don't know. We do know people tend to have a positivity bias (a discounting of possibility of poor outcomes, statistically speaking, for personal efforts) absent depression or anxiety, so that's easy to understand.

There's rationality and there's being a rational person. Most if not all people aren't rational in terms of a state of being, because we don't have the cognitive space to rely on "System 2". "System 1" is "good enough" for the most part, even though it isn't "rational". Any support I indicate for "normality" is support for the usefulness of "System 1" in the non-urbanized. That system gets all kinds of fucked up in the hyper urbanized and over-educated, because it's not evolutionarily adjusted for those contexts. Not to say it is perfect otherwise by any means, but it's often better than relying on shitty environmental learning and a bunch of maybe true stuff in a book as a guiding light.