1

Topic: "Not we so our children"

What do you think of that that parents want that their children had all what he did not possible to receive? Often such ancestors try to make children popular (on  everyones and other), solve for them  (the ridiculous reaches - when competition among parents) turns out and so forth Push on paid separations, give bribes - if only was IN. Generally what sense in it? After all individuality that of anything  with you has - at them no  and at you the , you do not feel that they feel. And in it there is one minus. Those children, which parents do not intend to give life for the child - lose competitive advantage. They need to do all, and it is much more difficult. What do you think of a subject? Whether condemn or try to embody in the children what in the life it was not possible to reach?

2

Re: "Not we so our children"

S> What do you think of that that parents want that their children had all what he did not possible to receive? Whether positively S> Condemn or try to embody in the children what in the life it was not possible to reach? Negatively

3

Re: "Not we so our children"

Whether and there can be a son of the general the marshal?

4

Re: "Not we so our children"

Hello, turbocode, you wrote: T> And whether there can be a son of the general the marshal? Perhaps if at the marshal of children is not present

5

Re: "Not we so our children"

Hello, turbocode, you wrote: T> And whether there can be a son of the general the marshal? There is a variant . Revolution and .

6

Re: "Not we so our children"

Hello, Shmj, you wrote: S> What do you think of that that parents want that their children had all what he did not possible to receive? All is correct S> often such ancestors try to make children popular (on  everyones and other), solve for them  (the ridiculous reaches - when competition among parents) turns out and so forth Push on paid separations, give bribes - if only was IN. It is somehow silly S> Generally what sense in it? After all individuality that of anything  with you has - at them no  and at you the , you do not feel that they feel. At least, 50 % of my genes S> And in it are one minus. Those children, which parents do not intend to give life for the child - lose competitive advantage. They need to do all, and it is much more difficult. S> what do you think of a subject? Whether condemn or try to embody in the children what in the life it was not possible to reach? I try to give to children of possibility and skills

7

Re: "Not we so our children"

Hello, Los Chtostrjaslos, you wrote: S>> Generally what sense in it? After all individuality that of anything  with you has - at them no  and at you the , you do not feel that they feel. > at least, 50 % of my genes Also what? Individuality, soul - that absolutely another, not having something in common with you. Happened that fathers killed children and children killed fathers. Genes - anything.

8

Re: "Not we so our children"

Hello, Shmj, you wrote: S> And in it there is one minus. Those children, which parents do not intend to give life for the child - lose competitive advantage. They need to do all, and it is much more difficult. S> what do you think of a subject? Whether condemn or try to embody in the children what in the life it was not possible to reach? And what to you a difference if you trust in paradise? Plunder, kill, then confess and go to paradise to .

9

Re: "Not we so our children"

Hello, Shmj, you wrote: S> Also what? Individuality, soul - that absolutely another, not having something in common with you. What is smothering? S> happened that fathers killed children and children killed fathers. Let's not to build on unusual cases outputs. S> genes - anything. Genes are the most important. People - only a method of reproduction of successful genes. Present, to you lived 400 billion generations, and you appeared a deadlock branch without descendants. A shame.

10

Re: "Not we so our children"

Hello, Shmj, you wrote: S> Also what? Individuality, soul - that absolutely another, not having something in common with you. Souls are not present S> Happened that fathers killed children and children killed fathers. Everyone happened S> Genes - anything. To whom as for me - it is very important

11

Re: "Not we so our children"

Hello, turbocode, you wrote: T> And whether there can be a son of the general the marshal? Zhukov and Rokossovsky to remind?  they had parents? Who was the parent at admiral Makarova (if about imperial time to speak)?

12

Re: "Not we so our children"

Hello, marcopolo, you wrote: M> And what to you a difference if you trust in paradise? Plunder, kill, then confess and go to paradise to . Not all so is simple. Before death the person loses any fear - says even that was afraid to tell during lifetime. Wants to be itself and there is nobody not to be set up. For paradise words are important not, your essence is important. It approximately as selection for traveling by the ship - loonies do not take.

13

Re: "Not we so our children"

Hello, marselo, you wrote: S>> Also what? Individuality, soul - that absolutely another, not having something in common with you. M> that such smothering? It that can feel . S>> Happened that fathers killed children and children killed fathers. M> let's not to build on unusual cases outputs. These cases prove that genes - anything. You even can kill own descendants, no less than on the contrary. You - independent organisms, independent souls. S>> genes - anything. M> genes are the most important. People - only a method of reproduction of successful genes. No, the idea is important. You can enclose ideas in any jacket, not an essence important  at this jacket a hair color or black. And this jacket will fulfill your paradigms. M> present, to you lived 400 billion generations, and you appeared a deadlock branch without descendants. A shame. A shame - if you not  own paradigms also will not enclose them in . And already the jacket type not so is important. Well, it is desirable that the jacket was healthy, and remaining not an essence important. The hair color and an eye of value has no.

14

Re: "Not we so our children"

Hello, Los Chtostrjaslos, you wrote: S>> Also what? Individuality, soul - that absolutely another, not having something in common with you. > souls are not present And what feels ? S>> Happened that fathers killed children and children killed fathers. > everyone happened It proves that interests can be different. S>> genes - anything. > to whom as > for me - it is very important That there is YOU? You - not genes. You are a consciousness. And for consciousness it is more important to transfer PARADIGMS, attitude. And not important red hair color will be at a jacket in which you enclose these paradigms, or black.

15

Re: "Not we so our children"

Hello, Shmj, you wrote: S> Not all so is simple. Before death the person loses any fear - says even that was afraid to tell during lifetime. Wants to be itself and there is nobody not to be set up. For paradise words are important not, your essence is important. Then it turns out that without a difference when and what to speak, for it is not known, when the person shows an essence - when plays the hypocrite during lifetime or  at deaths door.

16

Re: "Not we so our children"

Hello, Shmj, you wrote: S> What do you think of that that parents want that their children had all what he did not possible to receive? Normally I concern. The main thing - that did not forget that minimum which was at them. Everything that on top, is welcomed. And, by itself, children's abilities should be considered. S> generally what sense in it? After all individuality that of anything  with you has - at them no  and at you the , you do not feel that they feel. , at you an inferiority complex with  that you push it where , - anything in it mystical is not present. And, as a rule,  are identical, it tells statistican.

17

Re: "Not we so our children"

Hello, Shmj, you wrote: S> And what feels ? Brain S> proves It that interests can be different. The captain evidence cries with envy S> That there is YOU? You - not genes. You are a consciousness. The consciousness is produced by a body constructed on the basis of gene information S> And for consciousness it is more important to transfer PARADIGMS, attitude. And not important red hair color will be at a jacket in which you enclose these paradigms, or black. To me it is important to you, judging by what the child at you is, it too is important - so, what you are ready to suffer the considerable inconveniences it would be much easier to adopt 3-4 summer children and to transfer it the paradigms why you so will not make?

18

Re: "Not we so our children"

Hello, Vi2, you wrote: Vi2> Then it turns out that without a difference when and what to speak, for it is not known, when the person shows an essence - when plays the hypocrite during lifetime or  at deaths door. Important what consequences have words. Sometimes the deceit is the blessing (as that rescue of life of another by a deceit of offenders). Hypocrisy and cowardice always harm to the person i.e. if you are afraid to tell as is - you worse. Well etc. All matters, but not words and their consequences.

19

Re: "Not we so our children"

Hello, Vi2, you wrote: S>> Generally what sense in it? After all individuality that of anything  with you has - at them no  and at you the , you do not feel that they feel. Vi2> , at you an inferiority complex with  that you push it where , - anything in it mystical is not present. And, as a rule,  are identical, it tells statistican. Why inferiority? You do not feel  children. Or feel in the same measure, as well as  other people. If your adolescent became the homosexual and receives from it a high - you in any way do not experience this high, even mirror neurons.

20

Re: "Not we so our children"

Hello, Los Chtostrjaslos, you wrote: S>> And what feels ? > the brain But a brain is formed not thanks to DNA, and thanks to the environment. Esteem about children who were brought up by animals. S>> it proves that interests can be different. > the captain evidence cries with envy Up to that your child can be the homosexual. To you it will not be clear , even through mirror neurons. > to you, judging by what the child at you is, it too is important - so, what you are ready to suffer the considerable inconveniences > it would be much easier to adopt 3-4 summer children and to transfer it the paradigms > why you so will not make? To adopt absolutely not mandatory - it is possible to write the book simply. If, of course, in your paradigms there is something valuable. Or, think, to whom that is a difference the first appointment at you was near a breakwater or near lake with swans? What in you (in YOU) such, what deserves transmission to descendants? And to give birth and bring up is not for pleasure is your duty before mankind. Thus if in the world an overpopulation - that is enough 1-2. If extinction - is desirable more than 3. That is I do not consider this process as pleasure - simply repay a debt. Approximately as payment of taxes in a healthy society, but only a birth is considered in a global context, instead of with a binding to the country.

21

Re: "Not we so our children"

Hello, Shmj, you wrote: S> What do you think of that that parents want that their children had all what he did not possible to receive? As to good parents, yours faithfully. And here when try to make of the child what did not possible to become - negatively. S> often such ancestors try to make children popular (on  everyones and other), I  with  do not understand these, on , in the old manner, look films, clips and I listen to music. Therefore what for there push children - I not undertake to judge. S> solve for them  Here is forced to confess, and parents with  helped me, planimetric cards, for example, painted over, I hated this business. Still a diary of observations conducted on natural study which I in a coffin saw. Much still was mandatory nonsenses at school, especially in low, all you will not remember. And it is very difficult to child to do that, senselessness of that is obvious to it, but inactivity of that can complicate to it life. S> (the ridiculous reaches - when competition among parents turns out) and so forth Sorevnovatelnost - in a human nature why not to compete children. And still the high generation is frequent : and here at Njury  - ogo th! S> Push on paid separations, give bribes - if only was IN. So was always, to attach the children on places better - in a human nature. And without a tower, it is frequent - lime, now even with the cashier in an epicure it is problematic to be arranged. Such here an institutional trap. Behind a hillock this problem learned to solve, inventing a bachelor degree when actually you study in nothing, but a crust you receive. At us like would start to adopt. The society more provided became simple, presumes even more foolish expenditure, here and decided to prolong stupidly on a trick the carefree childhood of years till 25-30, it is ostensibly better, than on gates the moment to smell. S> generally what sense in it? After all individuality that of anything  with you has - at them no  and at you the , you do not feel that they feel. Yes  to parents on everyones , they  did not hear the such, from what itself feel - that is better and do. S> and in it there is one minus. Those children, which parents do not intend to give life for the child - lose competitive advantage. They need to do all, and it is much more difficult. And in it there is one plus. Those children, which parents intend to give life for the child - get competitive advantage. And if it allows them to play back more than the genes (so also genes of parents), this correct evolutionary behavior. Other question that necessity all do most can to give too competitive advantage, making more angrily and  (more independently). Here as carries. There are two (extreme) programs, there is all intermediate, everyone selects the at whom it turns out - that and the rights is better. S> what do you think of a subject? Whether condemn or try to embody in the children what in the life it was not possible to reach? And sense them to condemn? The children at me are not present, and among others I see that to whom parents helped - those help the children, and self-punched - is more rare, but often condemn the helping. So this program too is transferred, so, the percent helping more or less reflects success of this help.

22

Re: "Not we so our children"

Hello, Shmj, you wrote: S> But the brain is formed not thanks to DNA, and thanks to the environment. Esteem about children who were brought up by animals. The brain is formed both thanks to DNA, and thanks to the environment. Still recall about children whom the brick and at which because of it the brain was not generated at all fell to a head. It will be at least more frequent phenomenon. S> up to that your child can be the homosexual. To you it will not be clear , even through mirror neurons. Probably, it because any  does not exist? As well as mirror neurons? S> that in you (in YOU) such, what deserves transmission to descendants?" But about that we leave, let others sing ". And suddenly something is? And you do not transfer it? S> and to give birth and bring up is not for pleasure is your duty before mankind. Thus if in the world an overpopulation - that is enough 1-2. If extinction - is desirable more than 3. Where I so ran into debt it to it? While people not in the red book, that is not on the verge of extinction, it is possible not to do it even at population abbreviation. S> that is I do not consider this process as pleasure - simply repay a debt. From unnecessary unpleasant debts people are inclined to evade, and from it for some reason are not present. Probably, not all consider the given moment in a similar key. In China many do it contrary to strict prohibitions and severe punishments. S> approximately as payment of taxes in a healthy society, but only the birth is considered in a global context, instead of with a binding to the country. It is necessary to enter appropriate tax inspectors Though earlier normal tax inspectors were engaged in it, the state estimated this debt in 6 percent of the income of the citizen that is much cheaper, than to give its nature.

23

Re: "Not we so our children"

Hello, cures, you wrote: the C> the Brain is formed both thanks to DNA, and thanks to the environment. Still recall about children whom the brick and at which because of it the brain was not generated at all fell to a head. It will be at least more frequent phenomenon. DNA to a lesser degree. S>> up to that your child can be the homosexual. To you it will not be clear , even through mirror neurons. A C> it is possible, it because any  does not exist? As well as mirror neurons? Very much the other way - because  and mirror neurons exist. S>> that in you (in YOU) such, what deserves transmission to descendants? Cs> "But about that we leave, let sing others". The C> And suddenly something is? And you do not transfer it? If something is - write the book. Will be more true. Your children will be brought up not by you, generally. To you it do not give. To provide financially - yes, to resolve. To enclose values - is not present. Anybody does not give it to you. If will insist, for example refuse school - take simply away also all. S>> and to give birth and bring up is not for pleasure is your duty before mankind. Thus if in the world an overpopulation - that is enough 1-2. If extinction - is desirable more than 3.> Where it I so ran into debt a C to it? While people not in the red book, that is not on the verge of extinction, it is possible not to do it even at population abbreviation. It is not regulated by the law. Your parents grew up you, you should grow up the children taking into account an overpopulation/extinction. As though and parents have the right to refuse children, the law does not forbid. S>> that is I do not consider this process as pleasure - simply repay a debt. Cs> From unnecessary unpleasant debts people are inclined to evade, and from it for some reason are not present. Probably, not all consider the given moment in a similar key. In China many do it contrary to strict prohibitions and severe punishments. Still as evade. See the child-free. S>> Approximately as payment of taxes in a healthy society, but only the birth is considered in a global context, instead of with a binding to the country. A C> It is necessary to enter appropriate tax inspectors Though earlier normal tax inspectors were engaged in it, the state estimated this debt in 6 percent of the income of the citizen that is much cheaper, than to give its nature. Not more cheaply. If will put on a minimum - many money does not leave. If enclose with mind and much enough - that to you children render in an old age, that is help you.

24

Re: "Not we so our children"

Hello, Shmj, you wrote: S> Up to that your child can be the homosexual. To you it will not be clear , even through mirror neurons. Through back pass reaches any

25

Re: "Not we so our children"

Hello, cures, you wrote: the C> Here is forced to confess, and parents with  helped me, planimetric cards, for example, painted over, I hated this business. Still a diary of observations conducted on natural study which I in a coffin saw. Much still was mandatory nonsenses at school, especially in low, all you will not remember. And it is very difficult to child to do that, senselessness of that is obvious to it, but inactivity of that can complicate to it life. You truth trust that a diary on natural study as that could complicate life? It is necessary to learn to do children to distinguish important and  everyone natural study type. And generally from  there weather to draw five minutes of operation was.