antirealist

12 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by antirealist 3mo ago

   I think there are two parts of this issue. One is does the vaccine work. The other is should the govt prevent people from having it. Scepticism is healthy, and I don't begrudge you your scepticism. The scientific consensus can be wrong
2. 2.▲
   by antirealist 4mo ago

   I read through all of this too. It just seems that 1. why would the consignor decline? 2. if he did decline, especially "in writing", then why not post proof? As you suggest, maybe the reason is more complicated, e.g. some was sol
3. 3.▲
   by antirealist 4mo ago

   Murder is directly and non-consentually harming another person. Having a traditional family or using social media are choices you can, in our current world, make or not make for yourself. That's an important - and I think pretty philos
4. 4.▲
   by antirealist 4mo ago

   Society shares in the value because - insofar as the company is now worth say $X - that's because they have some way to create value that justifies a price of $Y per year for N people. And for those N people to be willing to pay $Y, th
5. 5.▲
   by antirealist 4mo ago

   I think this is essentially correct. I'm sorry you're getting downvoted. I think there seems to be a prevailing attitude here (and in the world in general) that making money is 0 sum and you get it by taking taking it from others,
6. 6.▲
   by antirealist 4mo ago

   Yeah the 'not being able to turn off shorts' is such a brazen, anti-user form of enshitification. Alongside not being able to hide threads in Instragram (can only hide for 30 days), and so many other examples. Like there is enough
7. 7.▲
   by antirealist 4mo ago

   So I agree that "check things that destroy society and make everyone worse off except for a select few if left unchecked" might indeed pass as a valid categorical imperitive. Putting aside the slew of problems with Kantianism, the
8. 8.▲
   by antirealist 4mo ago

   I wholeheartedly disagree. When we consider a policy, it's not enough that the narrow outcome is good . What also matters are the broad outcomes and whether or not the policy is principled. We presumably all hate Alex Jones. Does that
9. 9.▲
   by antirealist 5mo ago

   Hi Ronan. TCatK is a phenomenal book, not only in exposing the wrongdoing of powerful people, but also in presenting the meta-issue of how hard it was to get the word out, and you handled it all with nuance. You're about as close as I