@HermeneuticsOfVibes's banner p

HermeneuticsOfVibes


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2025 May 20 11:26:41 UTC

				

User ID: 3708

HermeneuticsOfVibes


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2025 May 20 11:26:41 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 3708

I think it is highly capable of both, as your second sentence containing three commas self-demonstrates. Nuance is used to describe two common behaviors: the practice of painting a subject in fine detail with a particular focus in outlining places where a piece of the subject deviates from the whole, and also the practice of painting a subject as so labyrinthine and full of interdependent caveats that one almost must walk away with the notion that the whole cannot be understood without devoting a significant amount of time to it.

The former is generally useful, and hopefully enlightening is the vast majority of cases. The latter obscures, is low value, and seems to be in bad faith most of the time (but, to be nuanced, I'll admit that sometimes people just aren't great communicators).

FWIW, in my relatively robust experience with one ADA office, they tend to accommodate ADHD by providing access to an individual, quiet, testing area, and frequently (but not always) also either give 1.5x or 2x testing time (paper justification being to allow additional time to accommodate losing focus from distractions in said less distracting environment). I've never heard of ADHD being accommodated via an untimed test, and I don't even know how that could be provided.

From the legal blogs, videos, and in person conversations with practicing lawyers, I've read, watched, and had over the years, the overwhelming consensus I've seen with regards to the skill of the judiciary is that the Dems are saddled with both: one of the greatest legal minds and scholars of our time and a top 5 all-time practitioner of American jurisprudence, and inarguably the least qualified justice we've ever seen, whose work with the pen is so bad it often reads like the homework of an enterprising law student.

While I'm probably not qualified to make that sort of judgement myself, In pretty much every case I've read where Kagan and Sotomayor have published independent responses, I find Kagan's overwhelmingly reasonable, while Sotomayor's is just dripping with Rawlsian social justice and rarely seems to find time to circle back to U.S. law.

Dairy cows are the main source of hamburger, as far as I know. Your statement holds for almost any other beef + dairy combo however.

I think kosher is as much a jobs program as it is a religious practice. As it stands, it creates two cottage industries, one specifically for certification, and another for creating kosher goods. Labelling goods as kosher without official certification will result in fines and lawsuits. In contrast, halal food operates on the principle of "trust me bro", and everyone seems more-or-less fine with it.

Thanks for linking the article, it was largely a good review of a book I'd otherwise not have read anyways.

While Scott is a bit out of touch here, I can't say it really affects my opinion of him all that much. While most folks don't have nannies, many definitely do, and I think you'll find that most people with nannies are upper quartile income but not necessarily swimming in money. I'm close with someone who nannied all through her master's program, and so far as I've heard, nannying mostly selects for dual income families that value their free time more than savings and early retirement (same folks also seem to go on multiple vacations a year, sometimes with kids, sometimes without).

As far as commonality, it seems to be about 1 in 8 households with under 3's in California: https://cscce.berkeley.edu/publications/report/parent-preferences-in-family-friend-neighbor-and-nanny-care/

I'd imagine the rates are lower elsewhere in the US.