ulyssessword
No bio...
User ID: 308
I've never seen a minivan on a jobsite here (working on new-built commercial/industrial buildings). It's all either pickup trucks or full-sized vans.
By my reading, only "officially", while the "true" agreement is for a simultaneous ceasefire as described in the previous sentence.
I thought it was a good effort at introducing something that may not have otherwise been discussed
I mentioned it downthread, but I literally don't know what the point was. Since you saw something interesting here, could you explain it?
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time,
Dang, my optimism was misplaced here. I'm not even sure what I'm supposed to be engaging with, as "the alt-right is bad" isn't a very interesting thesis.
"even if someone gives fully informed consent...they have the right to [revoke it]"
Heading off on a bit of a tangent, I've seen arguments like that a few times. They never quite sit right with me, or at least they feel incomplete.
When I see that argument, I imagine a hierarchy of agreements: at the bottom are mundane ones that anyone can agree to. In the middle are serious agreements that are restricted to adults of sound mind (legal contracts, etc.) because children can't fathom the consequences of signing. At the top are super serious ones that no living human could be expected to follow through on (e.g. that take on the violinist) because adults can't fathom the consequences of signing.
With that in mind, the fully-consenting-violinist arguments says that (by analogy) motherhood is a superhuman commitment that no adult should be held to, regardless of any indications they might make otherwise.
One can just say that parents should have...
Is your "should" borne out as a matter of fact? I don't think so.
You can argue that the asymmetry is unjust, but that's not the same as stating the asymmetry doesn't exist.
But the hallmark of authoritarianism is to expand the definition of "undesirable" to include your political opponents -
What's it a hallmark of when the definition of "undesirable" excludes literal criminals, classified based on their criminality (not as an incidental feature like MLK)?
I agree with your concern over the lack of process (are those people actually illegal immigrants? Are we sure?), but the intended targets are appropriate targets for persecution.
You're just parroting the progressive line that more choices equal more freedom.
The point of the turn signal is to signal, it's pointless to do when nobody's around so if you're completely certain, there is no need. It's hard to be completely certain however, so lean on doing it all the time to build habit.
A common story element among those with poor awareness: "I was driving along, then this car comes out of nowhere and..." No, aliens didn't teleport a car next to you. The car drove to that location and you weren't paying enough attention to note blind entry points and/or track their approach. (also, you didn't realize that the story would cast you in a negative light).
Signalling 100% of the time is the way to go, for exactly the reasons you laid out.
- Prev
- Next
Same with sports, and yet regional U16 boys teams routinely beat world-class women's teams in hockey and soccer (at least).
Being better than every woman in the world at a physical activity isn't too outlandish for a man, and I'd bet that being better than every woman in a given city isn't uncommon among dedicated amateurs.
More options
Context Copy link