Rosencrantz2
1d ago
If true it makes a difference but not that much of one. It's a divisive strategy that is contemptuous of democracy and makes him an enemy of democracy.
Rosencrantz2
2d ago
I don't agree with this myself, but I suppose another steelman position would say that prior to transgenderism, terms like "women" and "men", "fathers" and "mothers" etc were not highly resolved, just like most natural language terms. We had not had cause to decide whether they refer to outward signs of feminity/masculinity, internal states such as genetics and gamete size, or psychological ones such as the sense one is a man. All these things were usually clustered together. Once edge cases appear, though, it's in our gift to further specify how we'll use the words in future.
Under this reading, sure, it is a language change or precisification to stipulate that we have always really been talking about e.g. psychological identity, but it would equally be one to say we have always been talking about gamete type. Examination of the previous usage of terms may not give a 100% clear answer.
(I guess this is basically Kripke/Putnam/Wittgenstein applied to gender, so no doubt there is a philosopher somewhere who has publicly adopted this position.)
Rosencrantz2
4d ago
I enjoyed it more than you (though it seems unlikely to ascend to previous Vince Gilligan heights, and the lag time between seasons is a bit of a killer).
It doesn't break new philosophical ground but it really landed 'overly efficient logistics = the death of all that is human' in an emotional way, for instance in that opening scene to the finale with the singing tribespeople, who fall tragically silent. I haven't seen that before. I also found the choreography of people moving as one throughout really cool to watch. And I think it's really funny in places.
Sure, Carol is very flawed, but also, her wife suddenly died, and then humanity was replaced before her eyes, and it seems like the whole construction of the show requires her to be antisocial in counterpoint to the extremely socially motivated Others ...
7.5/10
Rosencrantz2
8d ago
If we've done that already, I think it's sad but inevitable. If we haven't done it, and there is, say, an unsigned cliff edge, I think it's worth kicking up a fuss and lobbying for someone to put up a sign.
In the case of ICE, it seems apparent that we haven't done this work. It is not currently minimising risk nearly as well as it could.
Edit: I'm not sure I entirely understand the stipulation that the wreck wasn't their fault, can you elaborate?
Rosencrantz2
8d ago
This is exactly where OP equivocates. This passage fails to deny the 'traditional' reading of 'deserve'. (In addition it also implies that Pretti necessitated his own killing, which obviously many people think is not the case, even if it wouldn't have happened were it not for high-risk decisions that he took.)
Rosencrantz2
8d ago
I don't think it was a shocking event at all so on that level I agree. It was a dead cert that something like this would happen. That's one of the reasons they should have better policing practices, training and comms in the first place.
Rosencrantz2
8d ago
Pretty strongly. We should try and do something about it on both sides. Warn your friends not to drink and drive. But also, create institutions and road safety infrastructure that reduce the probability of drunk people at the wheel getting in accidents.
Rosencrantz2
8d ago
"Deserve" implies should. (OP dances around that a bit but, then, I only said his post was tantamount to saying such people should be killed.)
Rosencrantz2
8d ago
Well blind soldier for the cause here, I guess, because your post seems tantamount to saying that everyone who does dumb and risky things should be killed.
Rosencrantz2
10d ago
But why suppose an atheist who says "I don’t believe your religion is true, but according to your religion you should act this way" is more likely to be someone who uses 'arguments as soldiers' (any more than e.g. a co-religionist)? They could be prioritising logical validity, you don't know until you listen to them.
Rosencrantz2
10d ago
You're welcome to use that as your personal heuristic – ignore arguments from people in different camps to you and stick to your own ideological kind, to avoid being outwitted by an enemy 'soldier'. But this is a nominally rationalist forum.
Rosencrantz2
11d ago
Does that meme actually reduce the validity of what the atheist says though? Someone from outside your group may not share your basic goals but might still have a point.
Who knows? (You can certainly tell yourself that as you watch Kier Starmer's state visit to China this week.)
Rosencrantz2
12d ago
Isn't this where Bayes comes in?
Rosencrantz2
15d ago
He didn't confuse Iceland and Greenland. Why do you hate America?
Rosencrantz2
15d ago
The European right, or parts of it, shares a part of the blame too - there's been a veritable cottage industry of European RW grifters painting a hysterical and exaggerated image of the situation in Europe regarding immigration, specifically posting in English and not their native languages for an American audience (often since they've already tried their hand in local politics and failed to gain any traction) to get Substack subs and, if particularly successful, even appearances in popular American podcasts or pivots to the American RW think tank / media ecosystem or whatever. It's almost certain that these types and their arguments have also affected the American RW ecosphere, including it's social-media-addicted leadership, creating room for the mindset that leads to the current events happening. Some seem to now be going "C-come on, you guys... it wasn't THAT bad, we don't need all this..."
On this note, the current episode of the QAnon Anonymous podcast has a bit about Youtubers coming to London and trying to find scenes of Muslim no-go areas, only to end up having to complain about too many curry houses on Brick Lane.
The UK is in quite a bad state, but the picture of it one would form from right-wing social media has become a cartoon based only on fringe events which, while important, play little part in ordinary life for the vast majority of people.
Rosencrantz2
15d ago
Trump appears to have now given up on getting Greenland altogether and dropped any threats of tariffs. At this point I resent him more for his pointless unpredictability and obsession with sucking up all the oxygen in every room in the world, than for the consequences of his actual policies. What have we even been talking about?
Rosencrantz2
16d ago
The thing that stands out for me in the UK is how we do not hear about anyone in America either opposing or really supporting Trump in this course of action. It seems it's up to him to turn a nation of 350 million people into a territorial aggressor, and few others can or will make themselves heard above his incredible attentional monopoly.
From afar it reads as Americans not caring either way, though I know this isn't actually the case. It makes me question why the US system doesn't feature an official leader of the opposition. There is a voice missing in this conversation that such a role would help to fill.
Rosencrantz2
16d ago
7% here too, well with some apparent tension in there to do with free will and determinism to which I'd say to the creator of the test: go read some quasi-realist philosophy and come back to me bro.
Rosencrantz2
17d ago
I don't think Trump's sentences are any more coherent than Biden's were, he's just more forceful about them and comes across as less physically fragile.
Rosencrantz2
21d ago
Am I reading that right, you reckon half of people here should be able to nearly 6x their savings every 5 years?
Rosencrantz2
23d ago
It feels like a political attack ad made by a rival car company.
Rosencrantz2
24d ago
Dude wasn't standing blocking her car, he was circling it filming, likely for evidence
Either that or because ICE has been tasked with generating tonnes of footage for White House social feeds: https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/interactive/2025/ice-social-media-blitz
Rosencrantz2
24d ago
I think the type of efficiency we have is efficiency at maximising what can be measured. The causality between e.g. a fun sociable office and employee retention is hard to measure. It's somewhat obvious that there is such a connection, so it gets a little funding. But there's not enough numerical evidence to put it where it should probably be to actually optimise for success.
It isn't bad to be annoyed by stupid shit. If someone who is your ideological foe says stupid shit for malign reasons you probably get irritated too, whether they're trolling or not, especially if they are very powerful. Be honest with yourself.
More options
Context Copy link