TheDag
Per Aspera ad Astra
No bio...
User ID: 616
TheDag
Per Aspera ad Astra
19d ago
Great counterpoints! The abuses of the medical system in the past were pretty horrific now that I think of it. The stuff we have today isn't great but could definitely be worse.
TheDag
Per Aspera ad Astra
19d ago
I decided to go back to my saved comments on here, and found a great one on the FDA and progress that made me think. Here's the text:
Gleevec was approved to treat acute leukemia and was a major breakthrough
Okay? The FDA does not perfectly impede progress isn't a contentious claim. How about bromantane from my last link (An Iron Curtain Has Descended Upon Psychopharmacology):
My guess is the reason we can’t prescribe bromantane is the same reason we can’t prescribe melatonin and we can’t prescribe fish oil without the charade of calling it LOVAZA™®©. The FDA won’t approve a treatment unless some drug company has invested a billion dollars in doing a lot of studies about it. It doesn’t count if some foreign scientists already did a bunch of studies. It doesn’t count if millions of Russians have been using the drug for decades and are by and large still alive.
Does that count as impeding progress?
A generic EpiPen was approved in 2018 https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-approves-first-generic-version-epipen
It only took them nine years! Congratulations to Teva Pharmaceuticals on their achievement.
I suppose it also comes down to the baseline we're discussing. Does the FDA impede progress relative to what, and by how much?
I think that the FDA impedes progress relative to a theoretical-within-punishing-the-elites pharmaceutical regulator, and the difference is enough to make a material impact on a decent fraction of people.
endquote
Anyway, the reason I bring this up is that I'm very curious how the Trump admin has been doing tackling regulation. There's a lot of things going on, and regulation seems to have lost the spotlight, but I'm very much hoping that we walk away from the next few years with dramatically reduced regulatory agencies.
Anyone have thoughts on how the promised regulation reduction is going?
TheDag
Per Aspera ad Astra
29d ago
But it's still fine, because it made me think again about what I am unhappy about. And that is the (lack of a) positive vision of a secular, sustainable, fertile future for the general public. I grew up conservative religious, and while it's still among the most fertile regions in germany, even there is now below replacement. And besides - no offense - while I'd love to be capable of believing, pretty much all spirituality strikes me as deeply silly at worst, and obvious motivated reasoning at best. If that is what is needed to get people to have kids, that's how it'll be. But I'd like for us to at least try.
Sorry to hear you feel that way about spirituality. I hate to break it to you, but I highly doubt a secular worldview will ever give you what you want, especially in this lifetime.
If your priors are unbreakable here, I won't try to argue with you. But suffice to say I was a hardcore atheist turned Orthodox Christian. It can happen. Psychedelics could help too ;)
TheDag
Per Aspera ad Astra
29d ago
Ohhh this is the January fifth riot ok. Yeah that provided the context I needed thanks.
TheDag
Per Aspera ad Astra
29d ago
I think the obvious answer is that it smacks of slavery.
TheDag
Per Aspera ad Astra
29d ago
Can you give me some context for this? I looked at the video and I have no idea what is going on.
TheDag
Per Aspera ad Astra
29d ago
Cleanly lady and full time nanny are VERY different things my friend.
TheDag
Per Aspera ad Astra
29d ago
Ahh I looked at that one but passed haha. Perhaps I’ll peruse
TheDag
Per Aspera ad Astra
29d ago
Ahh it is not tied to this account, yet. I was trying to keep them separate but idk.
If you DM me I’ll give you the link.
TheDag
Per Aspera ad Astra
29d ago
Yeah I’m freshly Orthodox so still integrating into the community. I think it will come with time but not sure how much we have before kids becomes a bit harder. We’ll see.
TheDag
Per Aspera ad Astra
29d ago
Anyway, I think Bryan and Scott suffer from the glaring many elites/intelligentsia have and don't even notice
The glaring what?
And yes, this seems correct but is making me sad. My own mom waited until she was 42 to give birth to me, which means she's already aged out of the phase where she can easily look after any kids we have on her own. Sucks.
That being said the lady's family is a little more spry but... have their own problems. Man this whole thing is scaring me off of having kids not gonna lie.
TheDag
Per Aspera ad Astra
30d ago
Yes! Make teenage babysitting great again!
I think the fact that the modern school system gives teenagers a lot less free time in than in the past hurts this.
TheDag
Per Aspera ad Astra
30d ago
Ahaha much appreciated. And yeah, as I said in my own comment I very much agree:
I also lost a lot of respect for Scott! It sucks. I definitely have some ressentiment for him and Caplan because they're both rich famous writers, and while I don't put a TON of effort in my blog, it would be nice to be rich and famous hah.
Ultimately though I think this is the classic problem with a lot of rationalists, that we were talking about with the poly stuff earlier last week. They are extremely privileged in all sorts of ways, and go on to assume that everyone else is just as privileged or idiosyncratic. They basically just have a very poor theory of mind for even other rationalists a standard deviation closer to normal than they are, let alone an actually "normal" person.
I hate to be bitter and negative about this sort of thing, but man I'm starting to understand the progressive urge to scream "EAT THE RICH!" This sort of complaining despite being EXTREMELY, like top .15% privileged, makes me quite angry.
TheDag
Per Aspera ad Astra
30d ago
I also lost a lot of respect for Scott! It sucks. I definitely have some ressentiment for him and Caplan because they're both rich famous writers, and while I don't put a TON of effort in my blog, it would be nice to be rich and famous hah.
Ultimately though I think this is the classic problem with a lot of rationalists, that we were talking about with the poly stuff earlier last week. They are extremely privileged in all sorts of ways, and go on to assume that everyone else is just as privileged or idiosyncratic. They basically just have a very poor theory of mind for even other rationalists a standard deviation closer to normal than they are, let alone an actually "normal" person.
TheDag
Per Aspera ad Astra
30d ago
Copying over @RenOS's post from the old thread because I want to talk about it:
Let’s assume you’re a car mechanic. You love your job, even though it is dirty, hot and physically straining. You go through a bookshop, and stumble over one book in particular: “Why being a car mechanic is great”. It explains the importance of the job for society, it talks about the perks, and so on. You look up the guy who wrote it and yep, he runs a car shop. You buy the book and recommend it to many of your friends, maybe even some teens who might consider the path.
Fast forward, the writer is on some talkshow. Somebody asks him how he handles all the grease. He reacts, uh no, of course he doesn’t get greasy, that’s his staff. He just really likes talking with customers. Maybe he does one car once in a while, if the work isn’t too hard and the car is really nice.
I can’t help but think this after reading Scott’s latest book review of “Selfish reasons to have more kids”. No, we don’t have nannies and housekeepers. In fact, almost nobody we know has them. Some have a cleaning lady coming … once per week, for an hour or so. Tbh, this significantly lowered my opinion of both Scott and Caplan. If you want a vision of a more fertile, sustainable future for the general population, it should not involve having your own personal staff. Two hours is nothing.
And I find this especially frustrating since I think it’s really not necessary; Yes having small kids is really exhausting - after putting the kids to bed around 8-9, my personal routine is to clean the house for two hours until 10-11 every day, and then directly go to bed with maybe an audiobook on (but often I’m too tired for even that, and enjoy falling to sleep directly) - but it’s doable, and the older the kids are, the less work they are, at least in terms of man-hours. The worst is usually over after around 3 yo. And the time before that in the afternoon can be a lot of fun.
At least for me, one of the biggest draws of kids is that it’s, to use poetic terms, “a glimpse of the infinite” that is available for everyone. Everyone wants to leave something behind, political activism is sold on making a change, careers are sold on becoming a (girl-)boss managing others. Yet, the perceptive (or, less charitably, those capable of basic arithmetic) will notice that only a tiny sliver of the population can ever cause the kind of innovation that really changes culture, or who can come into positions of substantial power over others.
Kids, however, everyone can have them. And they really are their own little person (especially my stubborn little bastards). And they will have kids as well, who will also carry forward some part of yourself. I’m not just talking genetics here, though that is a large part, the same will go for how you raise them. Unless you leave that to the nannies, I guess, but that’s your own fault.
I wouldn’t have written this since it’s mostly venting tbh, but I’ve seen some here mentioning wanting to discuss it, so I thought may as well start. What do you think?
TheDag
Per Aspera ad Astra
30d ago
Just a heads up, there's a new thread. You should post over there ;D
TheDag
Per Aspera ad Astra
30d ago
Hah brutal. I don't remember but wouldn't be surprised.
TheDag
Per Aspera ad Astra
30d ago
Marie Condo now has a messy house, because cleaning dozens of times a day was not bringing her joy
Ahaha great throwaway line. That whole industry of self-help women who write books on how awesome they are and then promptly fall apart makes me very sad.
TheDag
Per Aspera ad Astra
30d ago
Hah I'm going off the Christian calendar. Even if you aren't a Christian, there are deep resonances in religious calendars with the seasons as to why the Lenten fast is when it is, etc etc
TheDag
Per Aspera ad Astra
30d ago
I like these. Also bigger pretzels dipped in beer cheese. Mmmm.
TheDag
Per Aspera ad Astra
30d ago
Ooooh yes these are great. Simple and hopefully not full of evil chemicals.
Resurfacing another old comment from @functor about Conservatism as anti-ideology. I think it's interesting to reflect back on now that we're in Trump 2.0:
Keith woods says it better than me
https://keithwoodspub.substack.com/p/conservatism-as-anti-ideology
Conservatism lacks ideology, vision and a moral compass. At this point it is just angry ranting against cartoon vilians who are satanically evil. There is little systemic analysis instead there is an over emphasis of conspiracies. If the populist conservatives took power, they would be incapable of wielding it since their policies lack depth beyond SJWs bad but trans people with MAGA hats good. Conservatives are too negative, their entire focus is on what they dislike. Rich people bad, welfare queens bad, Klaus Schwab bad but what is good?
My life sucks, boo out group isn't really lyrics that inspire or offer novel insights. It isn't surprising that the anglosphere right has greater problems attracting young people than the right in the rest of the west. AfD, Sweden democrats and national rally do fairly well among young voters. The rather aimless right in the anglosphere fails at attracting young people and successful people. A young highly educated person is simply going to find the aesthetics and the values of mainstream conservatism boring and unappealing. It isn't a uniting message, it is a message with no vision that is anti PMC. I simply struggle to see a well travelled, highly educated person fitting in to the conservative movement at all. The right is making itself culturally toxic defenders of boomer rights.
I'll say from my perspective, this view actually seems validated after what we've seen from Trump so far. With the exception of tariffs, which are already being struck down, there's much more of an emphasis on destroying than actually building anything.
That being said, I'm generally conservative myself and weakly pro-Trump, so I'm not trying to just take cheap potshots. I genuinely think this is a huge problem the right needs to face in order to create a more compelling and useful platform for the future.
More options
Context Copy link