Shawn

Not really. I think impulsiveness is though...

I just wallow. :blush: But, I do post a lot of threads about anger, stoicism, and emotions in general.

I don't like being angry. Do you? Isn't anger like one of the most self-satisfying emotions?

I'm wallowsome; but, otherwise OK.

Well, what do you think about emotional intelligence and empathy?

I haven't actually, last time I read a book in full, was quite a while. I was hoping you could possibly reference something about those authors?

I suppose this is mostly about men(?) rather than women? I mean, I get your point with issues like impulsivity due to instant gratification online or ...

Usually when someone with a superior IQ is asked a question and show little to no effort in finding the correct answer, that can be an indicator of th...

When working with a model, you need to simplify parameters. But, your point seems apt in describing complex phenomena with general statements about th...

Depends on the scope used in the statement, no?

That's what Cleanthes said before he died of laughter seeing some donkeys eating figs.

https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/1002618/how-to-find-the-shortest-proof-of-a-provable-theorem?

One need not pontificate or wax ones carrot over being here first or second or last.

Get some pigs.

Spoof a ledger transaction and make money!!! Or just wait until the ledger system gets so obfuscated by spoof transactions that it halts the whole sys...

For the complexity class of NP-complete for BQP=P, then it's not all apples and oranges between a quantum computer and a classical computer, is it? On...

What are your responses to those questions, just wondering?

Should I post this on StackExchange? How would you go about this?

@"jgill" and @"TonesInDeepFreeze" you might be interested. Cheers

It's rather wallowsome; but, overall, good.

I think @"Monitor" brings an interesting point. Is it that "empathy" enables one to be ethical? On the other side of the spectrum, you have psychopath...

Was it really more 'intelligent' handling over at PF?

I try and make it more interesting with #GuestSpeakers and #ReadingGroups. Those are my two main contributions. I plan to start a new reading group di...

Pretty interesting to see the responses. The history of philosophy is seemingly devoid of treating empathy as an important goal to be enhanced or cher...

Which kind? Not that I can ever impose such a thing on people; but, I'm coming from a POV where there's nothing wrong with being more empathetic, or i...

Seems true on face value, yes? But, in practice its restricted to those whom we most care about. So, its care or empathy...

Are you sure? Is this going to end up a discussion about feminist ethics if so? Can I at least say that ethics should be more concerned with empathy? ...

I'm not entirely sure, the history of philosophy from the ancients is devoid of identifying empathy as a virtue. Quite puzzling if you think about it....

I'll state it another way. Who would want to internalize 'rugged individualism' in regards to how MLK professed it? And, yet the right and many on the...

Well, with grandiose quotes like those I don't suppose I would want to. As if embracing rugged individualism would bring about anything of utility.

I have no idea what this means.

OK, then you said: "I'd like to get reactions to this assertion from the Forum." So, you don't care for my reaction, that's fine by me. I already said...

I don't quite see the utility of the quote. OK, so I'm poor, have to pull myself up by my bootstraps, and have to struggle to get ahead. By the way, t...

What happened to pragmatism?

Yeah, so I'm asking what's so individualistic about being poor? Are you only arguing for what the right tells to do?

It's promoted as the title of your thread: "Socialism for the rich, rugged individualism for the poor."

Yes, me-ism died. It's now rugged individualism with a shotgun under your bed.

What's so individualistic about being poor, unless this is just trite satire?

I'm also trying to figure out whether the complexity class is determinate for the first question I asked on StackExchange. https://math.stackexchange....

What you fishing for? I tend to lean on pragmatism, is that an interesting fish?

Yes, it's no longer a special place.

@"TonesInDeepFreeze", I've been wondering if the question posted over at StackExchange, is generalizable? What do you think?

Here's the other question asked just for fun: https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/4142390/completeness-without-uncountability

I got this reply, which is really interesting for me to understand: What do you think @"jgill", and @"TonesInDeepFreeze"?

I redid it and asked the following question: https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/4142390/completeness-without-uncountability

I have something that addresses this here: Is it meaningful to talk about computability of uncountable alphabets, at all and given this thread?

It's interesting for myself and perhaps @"jgill" that how do you discern axioms in the theorem that are non-computable from those that are computable....

It's an interesting topic, yeah?

Can you explain this, as I'm quite interested? Thank you.

Let me know what you think to say?