philosoraptor
No bio...
User ID: 285
philosoraptor
1yr ago
It's not a direct result of that law - it's not like the law required this firing, or anything like that. But do you really doubt that's a significant part of what set the context for this incident?
philosoraptor
15d ago
Well, there are according to your own immediately previous post, about 28% more WM/AW than BM/WW with no particular reason to think the flipped-gender versions would balance that out. This seems to roughly match my own observations for the tiny, potentially biased bit that's worth. The numbers and the way they were arrived at have a lot of room for rounding errors but not enough to cancel out or reverse the conclusion they'd lead you to.
philosoraptor
1mo ago
The stolen item is just ... an item. Anyone can produce a backpack and say that guy stole it and my friend here saw them.
A backpack seems like an almost uniquely bad example. You just separate the parties and ask each a few questions about its contents and it's easy to figure out which one it belongs to.
philosoraptor
1yr ago
Well, what I want to know can be rephrased as "what's so special about nudity"? I mean, surely they see themselves without clothes all the time, and lots of other cultures, and not weird fargroup ones but familiar European ones, don't have these hangups according to other posters. It sounds like you're presupposing an answer to that, and indeed an answer you can't even seem to imagine anyone disagreeing with.
I don't really have an answer, beyond that "kids are property" is a nonstarter.
Yes. You made a good-faith effort to make sure you were on the right side of the law. That's more than most people do most of the time.
EDIT: If you check the link in the other post I'm about to put up as I type this, there's four types of mens rea listed there and the person in this example doesn't even meet the lowest one, negligence, described as "fails to meet a reasonable standard of behavior for her circumstances". Going out of your way to make sure what you're about to do is not a crime certainly meets any such standard.
philosoraptor
10mo ago
Not as useless as repeating the exact point she and I have already addressed multiple times, completely ignoring everything either of us said about it.
philosoraptor
1yr ago
A significant portion of women seem to prefer sharing a top man over having a sub-par specimen for themselves.
Which women? Where? Based on what empirical evidence?
This seems to be one of those things - it has plenty of counterparts on the SocJus side of things - that's said because it follows from a theory someone is attached to, not because of any particular evidence that it's true. Outside of a very small number of poly arrangements, in which men at the top of the attractiveness scale aren't that overrepresented based on the ones I'm familiar with, I can't think of any cases where this is true. Yeah, it would logically follow if a lot of the ideas that float around the "manosphere" were true, but so much the worse for those ideas. But it's not something I actually see happening at any significant scale.
What's the greater evil: my psychopathy, or OP's incel-ism?
Since the latter isn't an evil at all, whatever else it may be, your psychopathy, almost by default.
philosoraptor
29d ago
Drugging someone so they can't meaningfully resist has been a central example of rape for as long as I can remember, and I seem to be on the older end of this forum. I definitely agree with the complaint that modern feminism has expanded the definition beyond reasonable limits, as the "social justice" crowd is prone to doing with all sorts of terms, but this is not an example of it. The solution to revisionist history is not revisionist history in the opposite direction.
philosoraptor
1mo ago
they get hammered 10-1
In basketball? That's an improbably bordering on impossibly low score, even if everyone's just learning. Getting shut out except for one free throw (the only way you could get exactly one point) is particularly weird.
philosoraptor
1yr ago
Not all of that (indeed, hardly any of it) is strictly true. For example:
If an undercover cop tells you to commit a crime, it's still a crime.
Sometimes. At some point it becomes entrapment; the relevant question is generally whether you showed the intention to commit some similar crime. If the cops merely provided means or informed you of a potential target, enjoy your time with bubba. But if they actively goad you into it, that's a different thing entirely. The case here is somewhere in between, it seems to me.
More generally, there are different levels of mens rea requirements already. This is not some weird form of special pleading, it's already well-established legal doctrine. For example, here's a quick summary I found on a quick Google search:
https://www.tombruno.com/articles/the-four-types-of-mens-rea/
I would argue that none of the four standards listed there are met here. Ignorance of the law isn't an excuse, true, but a total lack of morally culpable intent is.
Legitimacy doesn't derives from the government authority, nor does government authority alone absolve one from following the legitimate rules of society.
We're talking here about a "crime" that only exists because of a(n intentionally confusing) bureaucratic rule, not some well-established "legitimate rule of society".
The second sentence of this post does make sense, but I don't see how it's related to the first sentence. It looks more like an argument for a more robust and technologically sophisticated system for tracking voter registrations. In principle, that need not involve any change in the laws at all.
In practice, it probably would, in the specific case of Florida in 2022, but only because the system has been made intentionally confusing, if not incoherent. Implementing such a system would require creating clear rules a computer can administer, which might not exist to be programmed in without reforms to the law. I would probably be in favour of this, but that's partly because I think clear rules would make voting easier, not harder.
philosoraptor
8d ago
I momentarily read that as "Transmetropolitan" and was very confused.
philosoraptor
10d ago
It sounds like you're talking about "social justice" progressives, i.e. the group RedRegard is contrasting with "true leftists" (sarcasm quotes his).
philosoraptor
15d ago
I seriously doubt there are very many people who want all that death and destruction for its own sake, at least excluding Ukrainians directly affected by the war. I'd like to think that's something people want instrumentally if they want it at all, certainly not as a terminal goal, and that most would prefer to minimize it all else being equal.
philosoraptor
1mo ago
I was envisioning a scenario where one person has it and the other says they stole it. But even in a scenario where there isn't a clear current possessor like this, in any such situation I've been even tangentially involved in, laying blame is a distant third on the priority list, behind getting it to the rightful owner and keeping the overall peace.
Frankly you're also overestimating the intelligence and planning of most people who do stuff like stealing backpacks. In my area, frankly, you're more likely to get drug-addled confusion about what's wrong with walking off with someone's backpack and why the fact that they don't own it is even relevant.
Okay, that at least makes it understandable. I'd still say that information is more background context than it is a feature of that conversation in particular, especially in a normal, healthy social dynamic. I mean, look at Walter's text message example. The power dynamics, if that really is the most salient thing, are just as present in a text with no body language or tone involved.
Additionally, even in person I'd say far more of the information about power relations and such is conveyed by the words as by the nonverbal parts. There's understanding of subtext involved (that even neurotypicals with long experience dealing with this shit get wrong with some frequency!), but that's got less to do with body and tone than it does with reading another level into the words. (Not nothing, mind you, but less.)
philosoraptor
5mo ago
More to the point neither one directly states support for YEC claims other than the narrow point about human evolution, so reading either one as "X% support for YEC" is running ahead of the evidence. (Even if we assume these polls directly measure people's literal beliefs, which per jeroboam, they probably don't.) Elsewhere in the thread, results from polls that did directly ask about the age of the Earth have been mentioned that got much lower numbers (30% at most, less if you change the wording of the question a little).
philosoraptor
6mo ago
I mean, there's tricky questions (both practical and philosophical) about what probability statements even mean when we're talking about singular events. But that doesn't change the fact that (a) they do sometimes help us make useful predictions, at least in the aggregate, and (b) there's a tolerably clear sense in which Silver was less wrong than someone who had Trump at 1%.
philosoraptor
6mo ago
What does Google have to do with it? How would having multiple viable search engines encourage adding links to sources that, for one thing, don't go through any of them?
philosoraptor
7mo ago
I think he's just raising it as a hypothetical. I agree it's not realistic in the slightest, though for a different albeit related reason - I just think it would be wildly out of character for Trump.
philosoraptor
8mo ago
Known bug, I think. Larian says patch 2 is on its way fairly soon and will focus more on bug fixes of this general sort.
philosoraptor
1yr ago
Ah, pity. I asked because I liked it and wanted to see it in the original context.
philosoraptor
1yr ago
Where is the quote from? It's not in the post you're replying to, nor either of the links it contains, nor the OP.
You (and others) talk like these are entirely disjoint concerns, but how separate are they really? Why is informing the parents required in this case in a way it isn't with, say, multiplication tables? Maybe it's a failure of imagination, but I'm having a hard time thinking of a plausible answer that isn't rooted in what some posters are calling "American prudishness".
More options
Context Copy link