domain:twitter.com
I think we have been trained to associate the word 'hate' with low status, by people who have much to gain from our reflexive aversion to it. Those whom we should hate, i.e.
Thank you for the thoughtful response. Agreed that arguing from the perspective of what you would find compelling makes sense, as it's the only way to find the real weak points.
On Point 1, your proposed solution is interesting. That idea of a negotiated peace is pragmatic. It frames the problem as a failure of mutually assured destruction and suggests restoring it. If people saw that bad behavior was being addressed universally instead of just selectively, they might actually buy into the system again. However, I think the cat is out of the bag now. The decadent 2010s seem to have ruined any chance of this working. The 90s feel like the last time there was a real effort towards a color-blind society where character matters most. Things are too tribal for that to work nowadays. There are literally advanced degrees for studying how persecuted X group is. We get worked up over unfair treatment of our own group and are convinced other groups are getting away with it / getting a better deal, generally speaking.
On point 2, it seems we’re in agreement. These ideas have moved from the comment section to the core of the debate. Not necessarily a bad thing, but I feel it’s harder to make progress when the ‘real’ arguments are more antagonistic than Ken Bone saying we can all get along.
On point three, I completely agree that America has/had a unique "secret sauce" for getting things done. My contention is that it's part of a feedback loop. Our culture of ambition creates opportunities, which attracts the world's top talent. That talent reinforces and evolves the culture, starting new companies, creating new norms, and building towards the next thing.
I’m sure it’s been talked to death here but I had a professor in college who talked about how Japan will likely never have a magnificent growth period again because their reluctance to accept immigrants, combined with their demographic cliff, means they're stuck on the sidelines (in terms of real growth at least). They have a productive culture, but they're starved of new talent.
I visited Guangzhou about 10 years ago and saw the opposite problem. Their immigrant population comes largely from very poor areas in Africa. They're treated like second-class citizens, are watched constantly, and frankly, fit Trump’s language about immigrants more than the hard-working people in America. There’s no real chance for them to work hard, integrate, and have their kids become strong citizens.
That's why I think our system is so special and powerful. We have the culture that Japan lacks the people for and we offer the opportunity that China denies to its immigrants. We have the ability to give people a chance to join our hard-working culture and succeed. When we send signals that they're no longer welcome, I feel we're choosing to break the most powerful engine for prosperity the world has ever known
Once you fire this spray of plutonium salts, it keeps going till it hits something. That can be a ship, or the planet behind that ship. It might go off into deep space and hit somebody else in ten thousand years. If you pull the throttle on this, you're ruining someone's day, somewhere and sometime.
…now get to it.
What an awesome concept, though.
The best partner is both, imo. Half my jokes are silly stupid nonsense (I can't even count the number of times my wife and I have accused each other of being a "Sneef Snorf") and the other half are clever and elaborate constructions designed to sound like something reasonable and/or intelligent until they think about it for several moments and untangle the hidden meaning: which turns out to be silly stupid nonsense. I once wrote a two page short story with seemingly arbitrary fantasy and fairy tale features all to build up to the conclusion which was a sentence consisting of weird typos my wife (then girlfriend) had sent me while drunk the previous night.
I suppose someone less intelligent could still have appreciated the goof, but probably not to the same extent. Or wouldn't have taken the teasing in as much fun, as part of the embarrassment at her misspelling is because she ordinarily spells things correctly while sober. And someone less intelligent probably wouldn't have been able to respond to my hack MSPaint "photoshops" of our cat's head onto movie characters with an even higher quality photoshop of her own. And someone who took themselves seriously just wouldn't have appreciated the goofs at all.
You need both.
The tiger is an active threat. The deer is not. Hate walls off the vile spark that spares the foe. And if you were at risk of starving, I bet you'd muster up the courage to hate that deer - for your family's sake.
There's a good Nick Land essay about this where he argues that space exploration is really about planetary disassembly by posthuman intelligences rather than domestead frontier LARPing. But the true vision can't be sold to the voters and politicians since it's too Nietzschean. Alas I cannot find it.
'Not very smart' in the sense of unexceptional or in the sense of actually retarded? Like they are two different things.
and organize with state Democrats to undermine Republican rule by adopting a more Texan-palatable local platform
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
I've heard less realistic jokes, but not many. Texas democrats exist to expend out of state donor money on various retarded bullshit, not to win elections.
There are hundreds of slightly radioactive buildings in Northern Mexico because one guy sold a dismantled cobalt-60 radiotherapy machine to a scrap metal company.
I recall a similar apartment building somewhere in SE Asia that wound up providing decently strong evidence (for a given value of "strong"; low-level exposures tend to have weak effects regardless of which side of the debate one is on) for opponents of LNT; that is, cancer rates were lower in the irradiated apartment building than its neighbors, despite similar demographics.
Edit: it was in fact Cobalt-60 contamination in Taiwan:
Based on the investigation conducted by the RSPAT,[10] the total number of cancer deaths among these residents is only 7 in 200,000 person-years or 3.5 deaths per 100,000 person-years—only 3% of the rate (i.e., 116) expected for the general population
Traditionally, redistricted has been restricted to the years immediately after a census, with outliers being driven by judicial command (or the results of recent judicial command, like the 2005 Georgia redistricting being driven by Cox v. Larios). In this case, the charitable motivation is downstream of the serious errors by the 2020 Census; the less charitable explanation is just politics.
Whether this difference matters or is anything but an ex post rationalization is left as an exercise for the reader; as long as it's a compelling and coherent rationalization the difference is pretty academic.
Wonderful. Another norm for the shredder. At least this time it’s closer to a tenuous gentleman’s agreement than settled law, right? Right?
What part of "the most gerrymandered states in the union are all blue; there is no more gerrymandering blue can do here" don't you understand? The norm goes into the shredder when the first side defects, not when the patsy notices and finally decides to fight back.
psychologically refer back to that seeking of ends as a terminal value
I think that's a very lacking definition of "hate". I would associate that word with an obsessive, rage-filled state of mind - which is both unpleasant for whoever feels it, and more likely to cloud one's judgement than to help with the task at hand. You don't need to hate a deer to successfully hunt and kill it; why should the tiger be any different?
Ok so what do you feel about a member of the Trump admin saying on video that he desires to ban pornography across the entire nation?
I'm happy to discuss this, but you can't expect me to answer another your questions, if you've been dodging mine for half a dozen posts.
but don't carve out the same thing for "them"?
Who told you that? I'm perfectly willing to do so, if I can see that they actively thought for free speech during progressive dominance the same way I thought for it during the last gasps of conservatism. You'll notice I never criticized FIRE, but if you're going to tell me they're in any way representative of academia writ large... well, that would just be a lie, simple as.
Norm. LOL. Here is the New Jersey map. District 10 is a triskellion. District 6 is your classic salamander. District 3 for some reason has a dagger through the heart of Monmouth County. District 11 is a Republican area plus just enough of deep blue Essex to flip it Democratic. And District 8 is just WTF.
The only "norm" broken here is the Republicans are doing it loudly instead of the Democrats in a back room.
The tiger, like a political opponent and unlike gravity, is a problem that you can at least theoretically end. And once you've made that decision to seek it's end, it is an adaptive simplification to just psychologically refer back to that seeking of ends as a terminal value.
Thus, it makes perfect sense to hate the tiger.
That is a possibility that I can't rule out with any real certainty, I did just date her casually over a few months. However, I still think that's unlikely. She's not a bad person, from my perspective, she's doing everything she can to help herself, just severely handicapped by not being smart.
He stayed with her for a year, took the idea of marriage seriously, indirectly asked for a dowry. That's not really the behavior of someone who doesn't want her, even if a combination of pride and adherence to protocol means he isn't willing to follow through. I still think that his ego getting in the way is the most parsimonious explanation, he's definitely not reading articles on the heredity of intelligence and taking them seriously.
But college, reparations, and progressive values are the same package as hard work, family values, and Christianity- just with different components.
I’d disagree that these are comparable, in line with your 85 IQ observation. The urban intellectual model of advancement is through education and a high-skill career, which is simply not in the cards for people under 120ish IQ. That’s the equivalent to family values and hard work, respectively, which targets a different demographic. So what can those urban intellectuals offer blacks? In this case, I think it’s race-based action and reparations (welfare etc). The final item is what’s expected of each group once they’ve advanced - for the urbans, it’s progressive values, like you note, and I’d place patriotism (especially local) over Christ for the workers (of course the individual workers have their own priorities - but this appears to me to be what the system, the tribe, wants out of them). And from the blacks, the only thing needed is the vote. This is what consistently pisses me off about the Democratic plans for black Americans. It reduces them to a client class. They get treats, the party gets votes. This is intensely degrading. Shouldn’t they get something to be proud of in themselves, the power of their work, things they acc do beyond asking for more?
So that’s why I don’t think they’re comparable. The rule system that urban elites hold themselves to is different from the rules they require of others.
My life is better when a random post of mine receives not just one, but two RI related replies. I can die happy.
Everyone has their own values/utility function, but this guy seemed quite serious about wifing her, right till the issue of the move arose. I get the cultural issues and desire to stay close to family, but she was willing to help him find an apartment in the same building! My parents might as well complain of abandonment if I move to the basement (if we had one). The barriers seem insignificant, it's no Five Regional Wall.
Calling a random civil engineer who reads court opinions for fun and summarizes them for karma "lawyer-brained" is an insult to the multiple actual lawyer denizens of this forum.
According to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics:
Lawyers typically do the following:
Advise and represent clients in criminal or civil proceedings and in other legal matters
Communicate with clients, colleagues, judges, and others involved in a case
Conduct research and analysis of legal issues
Interpret laws, rulings, and regulations for individuals and businesses
Present facts and findings relevant to a case on behalf of their clients
Prepare and file legal documents, such as lawsuits, contracts, and wills
Lawyers, also called attorneys, research the intent of laws and judicial decisions and determine whether they apply to the specific circumstances of their client’s case. They act as both advocates and advisors for one party in a criminal (offense against the state or the nation) or civil (matters between individuals or organizations) proceeding.
An actual lawyer-brained person would argue with other users about complicated issues, would complain to the moderators regarding poorly worded rules, and would present his learned legal interpretations of various cases. I do none of those things.
A fresh and youthful attitude is lovely and joyous. Is that what people mean by retarded, do you think? What, do you have to be jaded and brooding to be intelligent?
Well, whatever. I’m in agreement with you in any case.
I dunno, feels pretty fair as an opinion. The book-cookers get blocked from business, Trump gets a shorter-term injunction for orchestrating it, but because no real harm was done, the penalties are struck down as deranged and vindictive. I don’t see a better way of threading the needle between condoning fraud if you’re important enough and deciding on damages based on how much our feelings are hurt.
You must consider that the boyfriend is not being pigheadedly stupid and recognizes the offer on the table: and she is really that bad. That even a life of easy living is not worth the trouble of marrying this particular woman.
I don't know, a bit of naivety in a girl is cute... but being able to keep up intellectually, and even contribute to an intellectual conversation, is beautiful.
It’s a strange sentiment to me… I’ve never really thought it or felt it. Idiocy in a girl kind of gives me a sinking feeling, “oh no… ugh.” Intelligence is interesting and makes me want to stick around. I guess I’m the odd duck if people are stating it so confidently, though.
There are worlds in books, and I care to return to visit some of those on occasion. Why ever re-visit a place you've traveled when there are other places?
More options
Context Copy link