|
Is this where I can say I hate the Slate Star Codex guy? He's got this sheen of reasonableness to him because he can use logic now and then, and do a little research. So some people are sort of fooled by him or use him as a reasonable-seeming support. But in fact he's not actually good at thinking, so his ideas are more dangerously wrong and bad, and not just laughable. Guys like Thunderf00t are sad little potholes, but Scott Alexander is a patch of black ice on a curve. He makes trash opinions seem more respectable than they are. And I know technically he might not be a Dark Enlightenment thinker but his antifeminism and gray tribe crap are enough for me to throw him in the same box.
|
#
¿
May 20, 2016 19:40
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 07:20 |
|
|
It's caused by increased nutrition and general health. Also it's caused by whatever your modern health concern bogeyman is. Because while the trend in the past could be explained by health increases, it's just right now, in the last 5 years or so, that as the trend continues at the same rate that it must be caused by something wrong and bad.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2016 04:54
|
|
|
slate star codex posted:I once read a science-fiction story that depicted a pretty average sci-fi future – mighty starships, weird aliens, confederations of planets, post-scarcity economy – with the sole unusual feature that rape was considered totally legal, and opposition to such as bigoted and ignorant as opposition to homosexuality is today. Everybody got really angry at the author and said it was offensive for him to even speculate about that. Well, that’s the method by which our cheerful acceptance of any possible future values is maintained: restricting the set of “any possible future values” to “values slightly more progressive than ours” and then angrily shouting down anyone who discusses future values that actually sound bad. But of course the whole question of how worried to be about future value drift only makes sense in the context of future values that genuinely violate our current values. Approving of all future values except ones that would be offensive to even speculate about is the same faux-open-mindedness as tolerating anything except the outgroup. This kind of nonsense. It's hard to interpret SSC-dude sometimes because a) he's a poor writer and b) you can't believe someone could come to such a twisted, dumbfuck conclusion. But as far as I can tell, he's saying that to best prevent a future where rape is normalized, we absolutely must not criticize dudes who like to fantasize about rape futures and think rape is ethically isomorphic to homosexuality, or whatever. Imagine trying to pick a restaurant with this guy: SSC: Where should we eat? You: Hm I'm not sure. Just not pizza. Anything but that. SSC: *drives up to pizza place* Oh well, I freely choose pizza. You: What the gently caress, dude? SSC: Ah, but by accepting *any* future except one that includes pizza, you lay the groundwork for a future that eventually includes pizza. You: Holy poo poo you put a lot of thought into being a dumb rear end in a top hat. SSC: You're just saying that because I'm in your outgroup.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2016 05:46
|
|
|
Patrick Spens posted:Nah, he's responding to this idea Ah you're right, he's just blasting his strawman for its hypocrisy, which makes him very brave for thinking about this dystopia.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2016 07:37
|
|
|
Why are our social structures not working? Beats me. Anyway as I was saying how politics is just tribal outgroup identification stuff, not about real issues, which I'm all above and outside of.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2016 03:58
|
|
|
Imagine a Beowulf cluster of white boxen, simulating a boot stomping your face, forever.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2016 01:29
|
|
|
Old man yells at word cloud.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2016 13:37
|
|
|
ESR wrote posted:the most long-term dangerous of these memes — the idea that rights inhere not in sovereign individuals but identity groups, and that every identity group (except the “ruling class”) has the right to suppress criticism of itself through political means up to and including violence. I have ideals and philosophies; you have only memes and despair. We are individuals with a common cause; you are nothing but special interest identity politics. I am just one person humping a flag crying out for culture war; you are the ones responsible for chauvinistic America when it takes the form of a mushroom cloud.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2016 00:28
|
|
|
Skittle Prickle posted:In which Scott Alexander takes insipid contrarianism to the limit by complaining about people calling Donald Trump sexist. The only kind of social oppression Scott believes in, the only one that individuals can reify and cause Actual Harm to Society, is people throwing around the terms "sexist" and "racist" in his vicinity. I wonder why it bothers him so.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2016 14:17
|
|
|
The UK is/was neoliberal as gently caress without the EU, and shows no signs of wanting to head in intelligent directions socially or economically. You have to be a certain kind of fool to view Brexit as an escape from neoliberalism. Possibly the equivalent of someone who didn't believe there were WMDs in Iraq but thought it would be a wise thing to invade anyway.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 25, 2016 12:23
|
|
|
They get so close to understanding how patriarchy uses/harms/pwns/cvcks men too. They get thiis close to feminism and social justice, but the pull of bigotry or whatever is too strong and they spiral away into weird orbits instead.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2016 03:07
|
|
|
Not to mention the crushing social conformities. The Twilight Zone version of his fantasy would be him getting burned at the stake in front of a literal cathedral.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2016 20:52
|
|
|
GunnerJ posted:Whether or not anyone makes a stink when others do it, that doesn't make it a good idea on its own The mechanisms by which someone is brought to account do matter. Unequal scrutiny is a kind of unfairness people tend to forget about. Anyway, no Republican gave a poo poo about Clinton's IT security. The whole point was to try to find emails that made her look bad. This is like if your high school principal raids your locker because your mom is running against his wife for a seat on the school board. Failing to find drugs, he starts to go through your notebooks looking for embarrassing doodles or little side notes to share with the whole school. Failing to get much play out of that, he says your handwriting is terrible and makes you do extra work with your English teacher to improve it. Then some people's take is, "Seems fair. You DO have poor handwriting."
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2016 16:49
|
|
|
Tesseraction posted:That would be fair except the question was asked multiple times in multiple different ways and he dodged it every time until that one. I ... don't think Carlgon was wrong in that? You can say, "I believe (theoretical framework X) is flawed," and that doesn't put you on the hook to describe exactly what will replace it or where the replacement will come from at all. Of course, Carl Benjamin is not loving qualified to speak on the validity of feminism as an academic discipline, but that's not the point. I though that part of the debate was an annoying stretch of them refusing so hard to acknowledge where the other person came from that they weren't able to talk intelligibly to each other at all, and it actually made Dr. Winters look a little worse because expectations are higher for an academic to justify and explain their field of study. Could be my memory is off, but I remember thinking it boiled down to: Dr. Winters: Feminism has done enough work to have a solid base, like evolution or Newtonian mechanics. It will be built upon but not supplanted. Benjamin: No, it's a fad, and it will be subsumed into philosophy, mathematics, whatever. The battleground there is not, "Well, which is it, philosophy or mathematics??" It's like, "No, it's solid because of (lectures)", or, "LOL what the gently caress do you even know about feminism really?"
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2016 11:26
|
|
|
Thiel is worried there's no monetization strategy for parabiosis, but surely there is an opportunity for quality brands. Rich people aren't going to want to inject the blood of just any dirty poor.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2016 01:57
|
|
|
The genius of BLM is that they have captured in their name something white Americans feel is fundamentally untrue.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2016 17:32
|
|
|
Elizabeth's magical daughter/waifu -ness is pretty gross as well.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2016 06:04
|
|
|
"Men's rights" (and MGTOW) are stupid because if you really want to focus on men and not think about women at all, you can just do that without gender branding. If you care about how men are treated in prison, you can just advocate for "prisoners rights" and no one will notice or give a poo poo if you never talk about e.g. pregnancy. To focus specifically on the rights of men in contrast to women is perverse, it's pretty much akin to advocating white history month. The best MRA is a harmless idiot who may actually wind up doing good (yes please make men less violent), whereas the worst radfem is pretty bad because even though they live in a separatist commune on the moon where there are no genders or penises, (a) they sneak online to try to get trans women back on Earth doxxed, fired, shamed, erased, killed, and (b) when they reify wombynhood by having children, I guess they kick them off the moon, because even if they are born without penises, they are not "socialized female" by their moon lesbian separatist society, and thus do not have the magical soul of womanhood. They are Not Women; they have like philosophical zombie vaginas or something.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2016 18:05
|
|
|
Magnusth posted:Yeah, I was an idiot. I knew that TERFs were aholes, but I haven't had that much interactions with them except reading one or two blog posts. My bad. Sorry I didn't mean to pile on, I just wanted to dunk on radfems like a bitter transgenderismist.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2016 18:28
|
|
|
The NRx guys collectively are a bunch of Renfields looking for their Dracula, but Milo is perhaps the Renfieldiest of them all.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2016 15:11
|
|
|
Jill Stein was the only dinner guest not startled by the crash. Another night, another rock, coated in biological material thrown at her through another window. Even in Montreal she was not safe. She called the police. "Yes.. I need to report an attack. Oui. Another Bio-Rock: In fenętre."
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2016 21:57
|
|
|
WilliamAnderson posted:Sort of dumb question, has Justine Tunney done anything amusing lately? I don't want to go wading into the poo poo myself. Not really no. https://twitter.com/JustineTunney/status/754777162884976640 I feel like this is about the depth of her political thought as well.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2016 08:48
|
|
|
If he were a more practical thinker, I think he would be more of a dark enlightenment type, but he sticks to the clouds and keeps his boots clean. However as a Slate Star Codex reader/quoter, he will still get his turn at the guillotine when the great P C S J W revolution comes.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2016 03:38
|
|
|
I love the whimpering and blubbering about Romney's campaign that starts with this whopper:quote:In addition to not knowing much about the scandals above, most Americans had no idea that the sad state of economic affairs prevailing in 2012 had almost nothing to do with George W. Bush. To be honest I am not sure which part of the right is extreme anymore, they're all so loving delusional.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2016 11:37
|
|
|
J_RBG posted:I don't see quite what's so horrific about the Sam Kriss piece, it's overlong but it's pretty funny. His point is reasonable, it's that internet atheism fetishises rightness and says nothing new to the extent that it's basically a cult of pedantry. Without disagreeing that e.g. Dawkins is an idiot, what I find obnoxious in that article is the erasing of the (powerful and ignorant) Christian cultural context that most atheism exists in reaction to. To use his metaphor, there are actually towns full of ignoramouses who nod to each other and say, "The earth is flat," and think that is a *fact* and and put it on billboards, and think about it when electing representatives into the government, etc. If you grow up in that kind of place, you know it's real. They are not in fact possessed of deep wisdom about the subjectivity of experience. They mean that poo poo and act accordingly. So it's obnoxious when the wine and cheese Christians sort of pretend it doesn't exist and sneer at atheism in general. Sorry the fight to keep creationism out of public schools resulted in YouTube evolution debate videos that are ever so dreadfully tedious to Sam Kriss.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2016 03:44
|
|
|
WrenP-Complete posted:Foucault's Pendulum? Aerith = Belbo Sephiroth = the Sephirot the Eiffel Tower = Ruby Weapon probably
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2016 10:26
|
|
|
These fuckfaces need an economic impact study to figure out it's bad to litter. The natural inability to understand how an individual action can form a part of collective responsibility is the defining goddamn flaw of conservatism.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2016 03:45
|
|
|
Who is Gabriel Duquette? Just another grey tribe robot fucker?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2016 05:37
|
|
|
pookel posted:As explained to me by my alt-right friend, it's when someone says "I'm not a racist" and the SJW says "AHA! Your denial proves you're guilty!" I've seen stuff like it. The setup goes: one of the hallmarks of privilege is that privileged people don't have to worry or think about their privilege. They often deny it when first confronted with it. The stronger the denial the bigger the red flag generally. (I personally agree with this because I'm a filthy robocop.) The part of the dynamic the "kafkatrapping" whiners ignore is how they can't show a working knowledge of racism and privilege. They can't speak intelligently about it. They defend themselves with meta stuff and not real stuff; they're like, "You can't read my mind! I'm under no obligation to prove myself to you! You're accusing me of thought crime!" It's not the denial that proves they're guilty, it's mere denial. From the social justice side it looks more like Dunning-Kruger than Heller-Kafka-Orwell.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2016 17:33
|
|
|
FYGM sells conservatism a bit short. It implies a kind of indifference to others, who may or may not have got theirs, but that's just neutral, centrist stuff. True conservatism is more like, "gently caress You, I'll See To It That You Get Nothing."
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2016 04:58
|
|
|
Let's check this Curt Doolittle guy out I bet he's got some great ideas, maybe he can explain that word salad nevermind.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2016 17:03
|
|
|
The simulation thing is obviously ridiculous, but its weakest part (why would someone simulate me and everyone else, like this, a squintillion times?) is not clear to narcissists, so it makes a pretty good litmus test. Well, I suppose it draws in the Zeno-wannabe dropouts too.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2016 20:25
|
|
|
The alt-right is giving traditional and "scientific" bigots a bad name!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2016 11:39
|
|
|
I imagine most of these guys are pretty outwardly inert. Because of their rich interior lives.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2016 09:21
|
|
|
I've seen this Jonathan Pie video passed around: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLG9g7BcjKs It seems to be be getting shared and praised by the kind of smart morons who think SSC is a cool place. Also Totalbiscuit shows up in the comments. I can't watch it myself because I will throw up if I experience another angry white guy rollin' up his sleeves and tellin' it like it is Is it as bad as I fear? Who is this guy?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2016 16:04
|
|
|
Somfin posted:He makes the very good point that people who voted for Trump are not necessarily all "the bad ones," they're not all racists or sexists, a lot of them voted for him for the same reasons people voted for Obama Yeah, but: Obama: I just w- Lefties: Drrroooooones! Murderer! Hillary: Stronger to- Lefties: Wall Streeeeet! Hack shill robot! DWS! WWC: I'd like some jobs and don't give a poo poo about the harm down to brown people in the process, not even thinking about them at all. Lefties: Fellows, we must be nuanced.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2016 04:15
|
|
|
Keep in mind that percentages can be deceiving. If a vote was split 600/600 R/D in one election, that's 50% for both, but if it's split 600/400 in the next election it's 60%/40%, which looks like a 10% defection to the other side, but could also be just 200 people on one side didn't vote.
Sax Solo has a new favorite as of 16:38 on Nov 14, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2016 16:31
|
|
|
neongrey posted:Obama proved you can appeal to rust belt voters without packaging naked racism into the platform. It's hard to directly help the white working class. They will take things that help them but their pride can lead them to reject handouts. And anything you try to do for them, their knees will wobble if someone hints that it might cost someone a single job. The big thing Clinton offered the poor, the $15 minimum wage, wasn't job creation, and doesn't even apply to a lot of these people who make slightly more anyway, or make more per hour but work is irregular. You can also appeal to people by saying you'll stick it to their competitors and enemies. For Democrats, the enemies are the rich and the bigots. The WWC doesn't care about bigotry too much. So that leaves sticking it to the rich, and Clinton was terrible a terrible candidate for that.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2016 20:21
|
|
|
The Vosgian Beast posted:So this is just a D&D thread now, huh https://twitter.com/ESYudkowsky/status/798282581120675840
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2016 23:51
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 07:20 |
|
|
Does someone have a link to a good thrashing of SSC's Trump defense post?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2016 17:30
|
|