Budimir Zdravkovic

PhD student in biochemistry/cancer biology
New York, NY, United States

About Budimir

Bio

Budimir Zdravkovic grew up on the streets of Former Yugoslavia. Even as a young boy, it was apparent that he was talented at having talent. His lyrics and rhymes spread like wildfire as he became notorious at house parties and family birthdays for imitating television pop artists and screaming his lungs out while throwing lego pieces at everyone.

At the tender age of 7 he was already able to h...it moving targets with rotten pears from building roof tops. Budimir`s fresh and innovative style of writing brings a whole new perspective that challenges current notions of rocket science and aerodynamics.

At the age of 9 he arrived in Toronto, Canada and he didn`t have a hair cut until the age of 11 when he quickly became influenced by musicians like Metallica, Red Hot Chili Peppers and Sheryl Crow. You can still see these influences surface even today when he does stuff.

Budimir quickly came to be known as Budimir Zdravkovic among Canadians and Americans in 2003 when he left to live in NY and study university. Even to this day many remember his name.

A legend, a man, an artist, an activist and most of all a friend to some people. Budimir will continue to inspire thoughts and words in different people and situations.

Languages

Serbian

Areas of Expertise

Biochemistry

An idea worth spreading

Jean Paul Sartre, Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Issac Asimov, Albert Camus, Noam Chomsky, Emma Goldman.

I'm passionate about

Reading, writing, literature, research, philosophy, comedy.

Talk to me about

Anything you wish. I can`t guarantee I will always listen though.

People don't know I'm good at

Match stick puzzles.

My TED story

I like the videos TED has to offer.

Comments & conversations

162823
Budimir Zdravkovic
Posted almost 3 years ago
Could mirror neurons be involved in our ability to mimic facial expressions?
Of corse Nicholas this is a very simple example I stated, I'm sure mirror neurons have many more, vastly more complicated functions. I just think this hypothesis or assumption is testable because it is very simple. This is a very interesting article, can you tell me where I can find it? It makes an argument I've made on few occasions while arguing labor and politics with people, however I don't have any empirical support. If this paper presents empirical support I would love to read it.
162823
Budimir Zdravkovic
Posted almost 3 years ago
What brand is your child?
Thank you, So either a pimp or a biochemist like his old man would be ideal for my child. Biochemists are essential for the pimping industry although it may not seem very obvious at first. Certain sex workers have evolved in such a way that their aids receptors have fallen off so they are for all practical purposes immune to aids, the aids virus cannot get in there. these are in pimp language very "competitive hoes" they never get sick, to make an analogy it's like having union workers with lizard like regenerative capacities. Assume a union worker severs his hand in an accident the company doesn't have to worry about that because he can regenerate his arm after a few days. So where do biochemists come in, they are needed to screen such sex workers and identify the marker for the aids receptors and work in collaboration with pimps to make wise business decisions,
162823
Budimir Zdravkovic
Posted almost 3 years ago
What brand is your child?
My child is definitely gonna be a custom made French pimp. I think there is gonna be a growing market for this and I wanna teach him early on how to handle his assets and utilize his pimp hand. I also want whats best for my child and I don't think anyone will take his pimping seriously as an all American white boy. This is why I wanna raise him in France, give him a certain degree of authenticity by making him French and sleazy. As for branding that's easy, I'm gonna tattoo a bar code on the back of his neck when his mother, a sailor loving bar wench, gives birth to him
162823
Budimir Zdravkovic
Posted almost 3 years ago
Is Faith inherently irrational?
Who said anything about winning? That's not my intention, it might be an intention you are projecting onto me but it's certainly not my intention. Yes so two of the above definitions are related to the kind of faith you are talking about. Are you telling me that one is not supposed to have some degree of faith in a hypothesis? That having faith in a hypothesis is not rational? Well if that was the case no one would bother testing a hypothesis. Even theories, a theory is not a proper proof because it is falsifiable, believing in a theory requires faith, finally confidence and trust in a thing or person can be considered rational faith in many instances. All these definitions I think demonstrate that faith has a wiser definition than how it has been discussed ib the thread, yes faith can be irrational but all faith is not irrational.
162823
Budimir Zdravkovic
Posted almost 3 years ago
Is Faith inherently irrational?
There you go, that's what I wanted to clear up, we are on the same page. I think there are numerous ways we can also define real, and discussing the nature of reality is quite a complicated debate but at the very least we can place confidence in available evidence and fact because it is useful to do so, what we can do and achieve is dictated by fact, not by celestial orders or other things we imagine might exist.
162823
Budimir Zdravkovic
Posted almost 3 years ago
Is Faith inherently irrational?
I'm aware that probabilities don't have to be 50/50, they can be 90/10 for instance. But all evidence is evidence with reference to a theory, the evidence can either confirm your theory or not, you can have rational faith in your theory based on this probability.
162823
Budimir Zdravkovic
Posted almost 3 years ago
Is Faith inherently irrational?
Finally someone that gets what I'm saying, thanks Nicholas. Gabo, that's great that you are stubbornly persistent with this, but "faith is inherently irrational" is a false statement. Maybe the statement "some faith is inherently irrational" makes more sense according to the English language. If you wanna make a distinction in such a way that you either have faith or rationality, the two words meaning two opposites that are mutually exclusive then you can redefine faith as the OP did but that is not how it has been traditionally used in academic and philosophical literature, and this new definition reflects an politically ideological distinction, which in my opinion is much closer to the "trickery" you are accusing me of.