winning today

archangel therapy

Is my life at the moment. Multiple shrinks from beyond the veil

married by text

It's actually a correspondence relationship at the moment 

Karma

 Could it be real? Is cosmic justice true? Maybe we should do some scientific tests as such.

Psychology

 The good basis for human psychology is understanding perspective beause that is what people act on.

Ping pong wars

 In bygone days the ping pong wars lasted a thousand year. Bats were made, bats were broken. Ping pong balls were aimed at eyeballs, ear holes and heart valves. Eventually a superpowertook charge and outlawed ping pong. But, secret underground ping pong battles persisted owing to the addiction of approaching euphoria. They never realised that euphoria cannot be achieved that way. Rumours say that ping pong battles still exist. Woe betide those that find them.

Stopping a person doing a thing

 Is it possible to stop a person from doing a thing? It is definitely desireable to stop a person from doing a thing sometimes, a damaging or dangerous thing for example. Laws clearly do not completely stop a person from a thing because evidence shows that laws, even when known, get broken. Can a persuasive argument stop a person from doing a thing? Why did people makes slaves do things with whips and threats instead of with persuasive arguments? Rather, to stay on topic, why did the stop them from escaping with threats and systems rather than persuasive arguemtns, but an established and understood societal system of being brought back or being a slave elsehwere explains that to be a persuasive argument on its own. So then a system can prevent liberation of a slave, but slaves did attempt to escape and sometimes succeeded so then a system and/or argument cannot necessarily completely prevent or make a person do a thing.

If someone fully understands that they should not do a thing in a way that they agree with, for example if slaves enjoyed being slaves, would they then conclusively not do the thing of escape or revolt. Is finding agreement on an issue or system construction a way to stop people doing a thing. So maybe a new understanding can entirely change behaviour.

An experiment can be performed by making an arbitrary rule and asking someone to comply then giving them an incentive not to comply and if they take the incentive it can be inferred that they do not agree with the rule. Rewriting the rule until they no longer take any possible or imaginable incentive would be to discover a way to find obeyance of the rule.

Is not harming oneself always a sufficient incentive, not so as slaves escape at great risk to themselves. Is explaining the result of breaking the rule in advance sufficient incentive? Explaining the punishment for breaking the rule is not sufficient incentive as people are aware of crimes resuslting in imprisonment and still commit crimes.

Is understanding the reason for the rule sufficient incentive? This hits more to the mark. Conveying an effect of breaking a rule that a person agrees with by explanation and/or demonstration certainly could enable a person to defy incentive of breaking the rule.

Do we all agree on the laws of society? If everyone has the same fundamental human nature then it seems we do not all agree on the rules of society or the system that we are in because every rule gets broken so our ability to understand rules are similar from person to person and even basic rules get broken. Fairness and justice and right and wrong might be inherent understandings to human nature so then rules need to be in agreement with inherent properties of a person as such.

In a society where people agree with all the rules and see no injstice in the rules do they get obeyed? I believe they do. A good example is lawfulness rates in highly advanced countries with little inequality or corruption.

ancient history

Looking back at ancient history we can find examples of long periods of peace and equality. However, as Simone de Beauvoir proved, injustice goes a long way back and a lot of thought needs to be undone. Maybe the first caveman who punched his wife in the face started everything going wrong and it went from there. There are famous queens hidden to us by the patriarchal version of history and equality ideas that they also hid from us. Historians and anthropologists need to correct education. 

religion

What do we do with it, how do we reinvent it as the world changes. Maybe religion and dogma should be adaptable. 

how to know if an idea is a good idea

If the idea is well received it doesn't necessarily mean it's a good idea. Goodness needs to be evaluated by consultation until every existing criteria of goodness is fulfilled and then the reasonable assumption would be that it is a good idea. However, continued debate and development of the idea and definition of goodness is also needed taking into account every culture, is needed to ensure it is a probable good idea even in changing times. The idea needs to always be open to questioning to ensure ongoing questioning and improvement. By the laws of nature, stasis is impossible, so continual improvement is the ideal. 

human nature

People are intrinsically the same, they need things for themselves. If they don't know how to get them, they just try anything. When someone commits a crime it is because they don't know how to get that food, money or emotional release that they believe themselves to be needing. Some people try things expecting them not to work and then regret them. Some people try things as a cry for help because they don't have the words or anyone to say them to. Not everyone can find that person to talk to, knows what to say, can afford the fee or would even maybe not be listened to. If people are heard and helped, almost all crime and hardship could be avoided. Inventing ways for people to find their answers isn't always enough without implementation and assistance from things like government or religion. Typically, given the option, people choose harmless and peaceful means.