trendroid

Thanks for elaborating!

Possible to Elaborate?

I thought they were using tennis analogy, where player hitting the ball out or on the net without being forced to by the opponent counts as an unforced error.

For some reason many of these people that lose trust in traditional media immediately start trusting "independent media" on YouTube that happens to agrees with their views or ways of seeing the world.

Not op but yes they meant that.

Comment on youtube:

>How does Jordi type commands so quickly?

I did wonder while watching the video if I would have thought the same thing if I wasn't coming from this thread. It was a little too subtle I guess.

>Maybe I'm missing something.

The features you explained are exactly what I was looking for in a mobile browser. In fact, i wish they launch Focus for Desktops operating systems too.

Do you have good resources in mind on Walmart's harmful practices? Yes, I can search internet but looking for long sophisticated essays or even good books on the topic that you may have come across.

I am not from US but currently studying here and haven't thought much about this topic. Walmart, Walgreen and Amazon feel too convenient. I would love to learn more on the topic before it becomes a habit.

>A great preparation they should learn some math or ideally be having fun with their friends, running around outside or perhaps art or something creative.

Not sure why there is a dichotomy between this and playing a game on phone for 30 minutes to learn coding.

>You want to compromise on the stuff that other people find important and hold fast on the stuff that you find important.

Isn't the definition of "important" what people disagree over when it comes to compromise? My girlfriend can say X is super important to her but in my eyes Y is more important than X and hence I will have to let go of X and hold on to Y. Convincing someone of why X or Y is more important than the other is where most of the conflict happens.

>"You need to show love in the ways that other people want to receive it, not the way you want to send it."

This is true and easy to follow but it doesn't capture my concern above which seems to be much more complex than this scenario.

>I won't say which camp I think Prof. Hájek falls into with this Aeon piece

The way you put it in this comment, it may feel to some that you are suggesting the author is trying to indoctrinate. I highly recommend people to read the article itself to find that out. It's doing no such thing in my opinion and makes sure to not sound like having an agenda. The author may simply choose some examples that happen to increase reader's interest and hence make them finish the article and understand the concept better.

He ends with this which is not how you indoctrinate someone:

"Where does this leave us? Well, we did not manage to prove the existence of God, nor prove his non-existence. (I hope you are not too disappointed!) But that’s par for the course in philosophy – it rarely proves anything conclusively. Instead, I hope I have given you some sense of what philosophical reasoning is like, and how that reasoning can be stimulated and enhanced by the use of various heuristics. Along the way, we saw some instances of what followed from what (or not), exposed some sophisms, spotted some fallacies, and policed some of our reasoning."

The fact is that our brains have been so incessantly bombarded with propaganda from different places that we start noticing it even when none exists. In other words, Apophenia.

I am very curious. Can you briefly explain what do you mean by "that took 2 calls"?