User talk:Kingdamian1/Archive2

Your videos
They're mildly entertaining. I'm not really sure what their purpose is but I guess they're mildly entertaining. 21:12, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
 * So you liked them?--Kingdamian1 (talk) 01:04, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Have you ever?
have you ever been in a situation where you felt alone? Like no one could understand you? Like this was THE RUIN of your life... and you simply could not imagine how could it get better???? --Kingdamian1 (talk) 18:45, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes. Does religion help you with that? RoninMacbeth (talk) 04:08, 11 July 2017 (UTC)


 * It depends what you mean by religion... does knowing things happen for a reason help? Absolutely!--Kingdamian1 (talk) 04:42, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, that and the knowledge that a deity loves you.
 * I take a different approach. I know (well, think) that eventually everything will die. You, me, the wiki, the sun, even the universe. I know I am a speck in an infinite void. But I overcome that through the knowledge that even if I can make a positive difference for one person, I have cast a light, however small, into the infinite darkness.
 * Whether your point is based in religion, or morality, or if you have no point at all, it doesn't matter. All that matters is that we make a choice. RoninMacbeth (talk) 04:52, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 * If I'm allowed to give my $0.02, I don't believe that the journey to the grave should be taken without hope. That hope comes from the fact that you can leave your name in either the world, or the minds of others through goodwill and influence. even if it was just one person you helped, your ideas and actions didn't die with you. It's the reason why bring written out of the history books was seen as a fate worse than death.--Spoony (talk) 04:57, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 * And if that helps you, then great! My philosophy helps me, just as yours helps you, just as Kingdamian's helps him. RoninMacbeth (talk) 05:00, 11 July 2017 (UTC)


 * So which one of us is right? Oh sorry... forgot you don't believe in absolute truthKingdamian1 (talk) 05:28, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 * The laws of physics, the eventual end of the universe 'in some manner' and a few other things #may# count as 'absolute truth' (until the next all-encompassing scientific re-interpretation). Very little else count as such - apart from people (possibly across the universe) will always discuss such things, hold a variety of different opinions, and (agree to) disagree on them.
 * Probably most people have the occasional moment of feeling totally alone and not being understood - but then accept that tomorrow is another day/that the only way is up (or at least trying a new direction). For most of us making slight changes in the pattern of infinity is the most we can do - and we should make them positive/enjoyable. 31.51.113.108 (talk) 09:26, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Arithmetical things, like "2 + 2 = 5" are absolute truth. Nearly nothing else is absolutely true unless we have the ability to absolutely prove it. This makes certain beliefs and opinions, and science to an extent, not absolutely true. At all. A classic thing certain religious fundamentalists to is cobble together all forms of knowledge and ask if any of it is absolutely true. It depends on what you're asking. Is Existentialism correct? depends on who you ask. Does 2 + 2 = 4? Unless you believe in the principles of IngSoc, absolutely.--Spoony (talk) 09:34, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 * The political/philosophical mindset of Airstrip One is likely to lead to severe psychological disturbance (and decreasing the official language is likely to lead to not recognising that the proles are actually discussing revolution - or totally ignoring what you say). There is some measure of 'absolute truth' - let go of the apple and it will fall, the candle will burn you, and we accept the words and grammar that make language etc. If we were to meet the proverbial sentient species from another planet it would be possible to develop a system of communication and discuss each others scientific and other papers (before discussing 'politician's pratfalls' and 'not in front of the children' stories and pictures). 31.51.113.108 (talk) 09:44, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

ATTENTION
Please, read the important message on my page... COME BACK HERE to tell me when you have read it... THANK YOU!--Kingdamian1 (talk) 16:33, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 * As a person on the spectrum, hear hear! We really need to work to decrease mental health stigmatization in this country. And in the world, for that matter. I'm sorry for anything you have had to go through. RoninMacbeth (talk) 16:37, 11 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Look... you have a brain disease.... it's not anything else... just ask anyone to explain how it's different... we know how they are caused, we know it's genetic. It's not mood, life force, chi etc. It has a REAL physical cause... if you aren't gonna criticize a person with asthma don't do it with mental health Kingdamian1 (talk) 18:57, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I think most people here would agree with what you posted on your user page about this, except the part about banning people. I remember someone got banned for the opinions they wrote in talk and essay space, but that was an extreme case. 2.126.236.234 (talk) 20:08, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 * For once I'm agreeing with Damian. There's a shocker. Good post in your userspace Damian. 20:17, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks Koi!--Kingdamian1 (talk) 23:20, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I need more people to read this!!!!!!!!--Kingdamian1 (talk) 23:36, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Completely agree (apart from the banning part). Glad to see you're not one of the fundies who thinks that mental illness is caused by demon possession or anything like that. Christopher (talk) 18:05, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I've worked with people with autism. That was actually a good post.- 22:00, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I didn't catch the ban part. Only part I disagree with. 23:03, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Posting as someone with ADHD
It is indeed not 'a willpower thing', and the common belief that it is is causing tremendous damage. Aside from the the banning part (which I do not agree with), I found your post heartwarming. Thank you, Damian. While we should not hate those who fail to get mental illness/disorder, we must support those who suffer from mental illness/disorder. All the best, Reverend Black Percy (talk) 22:16, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Thank you--Kingdamian1 (talk) 23:49, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

A person suffering from a mental health disorder has no control over it!
I think that is an oversimplification. No doubt mental illness has a negative impact on people's free will, and certainly diminishes their responsibility for their emotions or behaviour – but on the other hand, often one still has some (however small) degree of control, and the way one exercises that control can make a difference to the trajectory of the illness. For example, a person can choose whether to seek help for their condition, whether to turn up to appointments with psychiatrists/psychologists/therapists/etc, whether or not to comply with prescribed medication regimens. (Of course, in some cases of mental illness, especially the most severe cases, one can have no ability to do any of this – but in many more cases one does have some real ability to decide whether to cooperate in one's treatment or not.) And I'd say that psychotherapeutic approaches to treating mental illness generally rely on some degree of cooperation of the patient's will to be effective. (And all this I say as someone who has suffered from mental illness myself, not as some form of armchair pontification.) 23:59, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello!
Hey there bud, how you been?-- 17:42, 29 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Thank you... Trying to feel better!--Kingdamian1 (talk) 03:32, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi there.
I'm enjoying our debate on your essay talkpage. It's been in a long time since I got in a history argument. I'm also hoping to keep it more civil than your first one. Sorry about my colleagues doing that stuff, BTW. Anyways, have a good day. RoninMacbeth (talk) 02:17, 7 September 2017 (UTC)


 * sure--Kingdamian1 (talk) 02:20, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Conservapedia
What you are doing on Conservapedia (and Wikipedia, for that matter) is not going to get you unblocked, but rather, you are pissing off the administrators (myself included) and hurting your chances of ever being welcomed at the site by continually making sockpuppets. You are going to run into the same thing at any wiki community you get blocked at (including Wikipedia or Rational-Wiki). I'm not sure if you are just being a troll or it's because you are young and immature, but if you really want to be part of Conservapedia (and not push liberal or atheistic views), I would recommend disappearing for a year or so, growing up a little, and then sending a convincing appeal to an administrator who you know the email address of (mine is bnefriends AT reagan DOT com), explaining why you want to be part of the site, and what you intend to do if you are unblocked. I can't guarantee that you would be welcomed back, but if you are sincere, then there is a chance. 71.208.106.249 (talk) 00:01, 24 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Oh Thank you! Yes, like I said, I am not a troll. I do not wish to simply vandalize CP. I just want a civil discussion. Again, I have made quality edits, and wish to proceed... I thank you for engaging with me. I do not want to continue creating socks. I know, you think I am immature (I am 18, so I don't know if that is too small for you), but I really am in good faith and hope to edit again someday. --Kingdamian1 (talk) 02:11, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Sysop Request
Here's where we find a problem. Ordinarily one of us would just hand you back sysop rights due to the lack of explanation for both your de-sopping and your block. Unfortunately, you haven't technically been de-sopped. You have instead been put into something called "sysoprevoke," which both prevents you from using your mop and us from giving it to you. Only mods can put you in or take you out of it, and neither GC nor I are mods. We'll probably have to ask LGM or another mod to help. RoninMacbeth (talk) 00:58, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I understand. Thanks --Kingdamian1 (talk) 00:59, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

Template
Thanks for making the template. RoninMacbeth (talk) 17:03, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I can tell you are a history buff! --Kingdamian1 (talk) 19:22, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Involuntary Servitude, Class Levels, and Societies
We're both history buffs, the lack of involuntary human servitude in large, complex societies is a recent phenomenon in terms of the history of civilization, right? RoninMacbeth (talk) 23:27, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
 * No... I do not think so. How? Slavery goes well beyond prehistoric times --Kingdamian1 (talk) 23:35, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Slavery is merely one form of involuntary servitude. In addition RoninMacbeth was referring to the absence of such practices, not their use. 23:40, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
 * (EC)What I mean is that advanced societies that do not use slaves are fairly recent, mostly due to advances in economic and political development that make slavery impractical in the modern day. However, most of these countries only got that way due to, in part, the slave trade.
 * Basically, the reason that non-slave-owning countries (such as the US) are reminded of their slaveholding past more than currently slaveholding countries (such as Haiti) are reminded of their activities in the present is that Western countries perfected slaveholding to such a degree that they were able to claim most of the world's wealth. Not to mention that the reason we often don't speak about slavery in those countries is that slaves (or wage slaves, depending on the country) often manufacture goods we associate with luxuries in the West. For instance, chocolate is grown by involuntary (often child) labor. I imagine it'd be difficult for Hershey's to market its goods by telling its customers, "Oh by the way, slaves harvest our cocoa. RoninMacbeth (talk) 23:45, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Again, you are missing the point. It is not about who is reminded more that matters, the point is that Western Culture ITSELF is frequently presented as greedy, imperialist colonialist. I am NOT a big fan of Mickey Mouse degrees like Queer Musicology (No I did NOT make that up) there are several of these present, like Marxist Gender Studies, African American Studies which all paint these cultures or people in positive light, and then we get to Whiteness Studies that again talks about problems of Whiteness, a made up bullshit, in terms of how exploiting white people have been and uses some regressive definition of racism. And again, Stanford students REFUSED to have courses in "sexist and racist" Western Civilization. Basically, it is NOT about who gets shamed most, it is about this idea that colonialism and slavery were UNIQUE to the Western Civilization, THIS IS NOT TRUE. What is UNIQUE to West, is democracy, human rights charters, freedom of speech, enlightenment era, Renaissance. There is a reason why all of these come from one civilization. There is a hierarchy of cultures. Some are just better. This is NOT TO DENY the fact that slavery was practiced in the West... It was and it was abhorrent --Kingdamian1 (talk) 00:22, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
 * True, but the degree to which Western cultures practiced slavery from the Early Modern era onwards makes it very difficult to separate slavery from Western Civilization.
 * I am willing to admit that refusing to teach Western Civilization on the grounds that it is "racist and sexist" is stupid. Arguably, learning Western Civilization history is even more important so that we learn from the mistakes of our forebears. RoninMacbeth (talk) 00:48, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I have NO PROBLEM with teaching slavery and colonialism, but let us stop pretending that West is only famous because of that --Kingdamian1 (talk) 00:59, 12 June 2018 (UTC)