@FruitfulLemonyLemons's banner p

FruitfulLemonyLemons


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 05 02:26:35 UTC

				

User ID: 370

FruitfulLemonyLemons


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 05 02:26:35 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 370

Wow. Kudos to SS

Alternatively, tweets can represent a person's tribal knee-jerk sympathies while their long thought-out works represent having done the hard work to transcend these. In which case there would be a sort of veritas in both, but a different type of veritas in each and arguably a higher quality one in the effort work.

Yeah I get more Kantian by the day if only because it takes too many freakin clock cycles to manage all the noble lies

Suppose communism is bad (if you think it's good this isn't addressed to you but sure feel free to chime in). How do you teach normies this?

I mean the kind of normie who lives in a world where powers far beyond them do incomprehensible things like set the prices of stuff in the store, so that some of the stuff they really want is too expensive for them, but look, the store is full of that stuff, so somebody has all this stuff but they're not letting them have it except for way too high a price, those greedy assholes.

And then you try to explain to them how markets work and how prices come to be and it all just comes across to them as some weird bootlicking apologism because they're simply not on that level.

Is there a more "down to earth" approach that is needed? Normies who have deeply internalized rules of decency and ideas of "thou shalt not steal" (often normies with religious backgrounds) seem to naturally be anti-communist.

Now I'm sure some of y'all here (you know who you are) will say these people basically just need to be oppressed because if they have their way civilization is destroyed and everything is shitty for everybody, but if you oppress them then they complain but otherwise you have a civilization that hums along. But I hate this, I feel like there has to be a way to make society work that doesn't require telling a huge segment of the population "stfu and get in line or we're putting you in a cage". And I mean obviously violent (as needed) enforcement of civilized norms is necessary, but I notice there are a lot more people who are sympathetic to communist ideas than are actual active criminals. My point is more about these people, not the active criminals (who I support putting in cages)

Is there really no way to get through to people other than to just tell them shut up and take it because we're trying to run a civilization here

The answer is apparently as simple as the fact that she's 60 and lucid rather than 80 and comatose

and she's not Trump. Don't forget who this election's really about. This is the elation of "oh shit we can win" that followed the desperation after Biden's debate performance. I honestly think this is explained by fairly standard human emotional dynamics.

Of course the emotions get narrativized, but that's just what humans do unless (and often still when) they have uncommonly large amounts of self-honesty

Yes, thank you for the detailed reply

Do you know anything about healthcare systems in other parts of the world? Would you recommend medical tourism to anywhere?

If it's any consolation, I'm sure right-leaning students handle this the way we always have: go through the motions, then make fun of it all behind their backs when we're hanging out on our own time.

But it is worrying. What separated us from the Soviets during the Cold War was you didn't have to be an activist to do things like medicine.

You also wouldn't want to acknowledge views that are actually something a reasonable person might think if you are invested in believing your opponents are dangerous extremists (or I guess just weirdos is the talking point now).

I first noticed this in the 2018 midterms when Google autocomplete suppressed the JobsNotMobs hashtag. If there's something nefarious going on it's been flying under the radar for a long, long time. Took Elon et al to start complaining before it got generally noticed.

Sounds like they were visualizing some papal ass shit where they all meet in a closed room and then when smoke comes out the top we know we have a new President.

Would be kinda cool tbh

Amazing what happens when a bunch of young men come home with military discipline having been drilled into them. If only that didn't require, well you know

I wonder if DEI is sometimes a scapegoat for a general slackening of standards and lessening of giving a F.

But then you have to ask what caused that slackening.

You could bring DEI back into the conversation and say that the need to deny that there is anything wrong with preferring "DEI hires" requires everyone to lower their standards so as not to make it too obvious what's going on.

This feels like there might be something to it but I could caution against taking up such a narrative too quickly. There are other options, such as mass affluence leading to a general slackening.

It's worth asking oneself, "How have I been part of the problem?" Did I prefer professors who "curved" my grades? Etc.

DEI is pernicious but it need not be the explanation for all observed incompetence.

I would probably agree with you, though certain things that muddy the meaning of language make my blood boil (like "literally").

Ha, yeah that and "exponentially" for me.

But I recently discovered that "infinitely" has been used in older writings to mean something like "it never seems to end" or "I can't count it" so I stopped being mad at people who use that in a non-mathematical sense.

Not to sound like a silly fence sitter but to me this is obviously one of those "it takes both types" things.

Obviously language evolves or we'd all be speaking Proto-Indo-European or whatever came before that.

Obviously people need to be taught the right and wrong way to use the present language or it would be impossible to communicate.

Some people are inclined to push the boundaries of meaning and those people will never give a fuck when you tell them they used a word wrong.

Other people are inclined to feel indignant about every improper usage and those people will be teachers creating smart, sharp, well-spoken citizens.

The language will drift regardless.

  • Excitatory and inhibitory neurons
  • Liberals and conservatives
  • The thrust from the bowstring and the drag from the fletching
  • Descriptivists and prescriptivists

idk it all seems necessary

Yeah this becoming a Big Issue in the summer of election year is right on time. Very hard to even want to talk about it. Are we gonna actually fix this at the national level or not? What's the specific policy proposal? Why hasn't it been implemented or at least proposed in Congress in 4 years of Democrat rule? Etc etc.

My contempt toward the use of this event as a political strategy threatens to overshadow my raw spontaneous personal feelings about the event itself, which is a shame.

👍

Yeah I'm down with this. There should be consequences, consistently applied, for mob participation, that's the only way this stuff doesn't keep escalating.

Of course first there needs to be some kind of cultural truce (like that of the wars of religion on which the First Amendment is based) that brings back actual rule of law and gets rid of all the exceptions and strategic redefinitions of words ("violence" and "racism" come to mind) etc etc

And part was fueled by this having taken place after Smollett and Whitmer and Covington and Fine People and whatever other media hoaxes I'm forgetting. The right had been in too exhausted a wolf-has-been-cried-way-too-many-times state for "this is actually real and bad" to even be in their top 5 possibilities of what's going on

LoTT has been going absolutely scorched earth, and in the heat of the moment it pleased me in the spirit of "the left is getting a taste of their cancel culture medicine". Then had a moment of shame that I've been cheering collective punishment: I have zero evidence that any given person who locker-room-talks "too bad he missed" has had any involvement whatsoever in destroying people's lives over the past 8 years.

So it's back to being liberal about speech. Back to Voltaire/Hall for me.

don a red hat

Get it?

Is it a Dell by any chance? My work uses them and everything about that company from its hardware to its support is almost aggressively mediocre.

I too use a Mac but I have an older higher end Windows box for gaming which works mostly smoothly and without issues. It's more hit and miss with Windows since OS and hardware are not the same company, Windows is trying to make a universal OS that works on a wide range of hardware and this has special challenges. Hence why I prefer the Macbook Air experience for everyday (non-gaming) computing.

This is really interesting to me because it's rare to see somebody openly work from a foundation that social harmony is of higher moral value than truth. (Elsewhere you wrote: "You can't tell the black people the truth because that's ugly and no one has the stomach for it, so where do you go?")

I don't think this works philosophically in the long run to ultimately produce anything but gobbledygook, unless you take the Noble Lie stance of "ok, between you and me, we can speak truth, but it must be contained within this room and we must lie to the masses," which IMO still has its problems but at least it allows truth to flourish somewhere which seems a hard prerequisite to making any sense in the long run.

Speaking personally the idea that compromising truth in the name of not making people mad is an objective moral good is alien to me. I do it at times but always with a sense that I am selling out my integrity. Mostly just fascinated to run into somebody who's like "Yeah F it tell people what they want to hear, this is the moral thing to do."

I am not convinced a society earnestly built on this principle doesn't ultimately implode but time will tell I guess.

Straight male here but I've never once had a good experience trying to push myself into sex I didn't want, FWIW