Doctor recommends motorcycle riding

I approve of this video and agree with it, and also…

link

Rectal Raping of Palestinian Men Is Habitual In the Sexually Deviant, Serial-Killer State

As I had remarked before, patterns of arousal—the commingling of serial killing and sex—are tied to psychopathy. The psychopathic fusion of lust and murder appears endemic among Israel Defense Forces (IDF) soldiers.

Honed in rendition torture camps, sexual violence has become the coin of the Greater Israel realm. A glimpse into Sde Teiman, a torture rendition camp in Israel proper, revealed to the world that Israel has de facto systemized the practice of anally rapturing the bowels of Palestinian prisoners, most detained without charge.

Marquis de Sade, whose name is used to denote things sexually bent, was no murderer. The recognizable ancestor of the IDF is not the Marquis De Sade, a mere sexual deviant, but your common serial killer with added pathological paraphilia, and the ability to industrialize the scale of his crimes.

Paraphiliacs are said to enjoy exhibitionism or masochism or sadism, “in which sexual gratification is derived from activities or fantasies that are generally regarded as atypical or deviant. A paraphilic disorder is present when it causes …actual or potential harm to others.”

The habitual infliction of rectal rape on Palestinian men has joined the crimes of genocide, the making and mass-marketing of online snuff films featuring murdered Palestinians, and the commission of extra-judicial assassination the globe over. These practices are de facto legal in what passes for law in the Israeli thugocracy.

link

Semiosis, symbiosis, and optimization

The science behind people who never forget a face

link

Group of MPs propose to ban immigrant workers’ family reunification in Lithuania

link

Candace Owens reports 12 Israeli-linked cellphones present at Charlie Kirk’s assassination

Why FIML queries need to be asked quickly

A fascinating Swedish study claims to show that:

…the sense of agency for speech has a strong inferential component, and that auditory feedback of one’s own voice acts as a pathway for semantic monitoring, potentially overriding other feedback loops.

The source of that quote can be found here: Speakers’ Acceptance of Real-Time Speech Exchange Indicates That We Use Auditory Feedback to Specify the Meaning of What We Say.

In an article about the study above—People Rely on What They Hear to Know What They’re Saying—lead author Andreas Lind says that he is aware that the conditions of their research did not allow for anything resembling real conversational dynamics and that he hopes to study “…situations that are more social and spontaneous — investigating, for example, how exchanged words might influence the way a… conversation develops.”

FIML partners will surely recognize that without the monitoring of their FIML practice many conversations would veer off into mutually discordant interpretations and that many of these veerings-off are due to nothing more than sloppy or ambiguous speech or listening.

If speakers have to listen to themselves to monitor what they are saying and still misspeak with surprising frequency, then instances of listeners mishearing must be even more frequent since listeners (normally) do not have any way to check what they are hearing or how they are interpreting it in real-time.

That is, listeners who do not do FIML. FIML practice is designed to correct mistakes of both speaking and listening in real-time. FIML queries must be asked quickly because speakers can only accurately remember what was in their mind when they spoke for a short period of time, usually just a few seconds.

The Swedish study showed that in a great many cases words that speakers had not spoken “were experienced as self-produced.” That is speakers can be fooled into thinking they said something they had not said. How much more does our intention for speaking get lost in the rickety dynamics of real conversation?

This study is small but I believe it is showing what happens when we speak (and listen). Most of the time, and even when we are being careful, we make a good many mistakes and base our interpretations of ourselves and others on those mistakes. I do not see another way to correct this very common problem except by doing FIML or something very much like it.

In future, I hope there will be brain scan technology that will be accurate enough to let us see how poorly our perceptions of what we are saying or hearing match reality and/or what others think we are saying or hearing.

It is amazing to me that human history has gone on for so many centuries with no one having offered a way to fix this problem which leads to so many disasters.