4 ms·
> Human society has barely learned to cope with the range of neurological behavior naturally present in the population. Bullshit. > It's not unreasonable to
by snsr 11y ago
> Human society has barely learned to cope with the range of neurological behavior naturally present in the population.
Bullshit.
> It's not unreasonable to be afraid of what might happen when you throw new chemicals into the mix.
It is absolutely unreasonable. Moreover, it's really not your concern.
> It's important to remember that most people think the opposite way as those on HN. They do not assume that new things will automatically make society better. They have a strong "don't fix what isn't broken" tendency. And as long as we live in a democracy, they're entitled to structure their society as they see fit.
It's probably time for you to start using "I" instead of "they".
- tptacek 11y agoIt is not appropriate for him to use "I" instead of "they" in an purely descriptive, non-normative, objectively-verifiable statement. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Is%E2%80%93ought_problem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Is%E2%80%93ought_problem
- snsr 11y agoI may suck at grammar, but that doesn't change the fact that the 'objectively verifiable' nature of a position doesn't make said position correct. I think, in this case, that it's likely incorrect. rayiner's claims, in this comment, are exceptionally broad, unfounded and, obviously, a personal opinion extrapolated and attributed to a larger group.
- tptacek 11y agoNon sequitur. He didn't say the position was correct; he said it was widely held. He is right. Your arguments, thus far, are incoherent.
- snsr 11y ago> He didn't say the position was correct; he said it was widely held. He is right. Your arguments, thus far, are incoherent. Completely unsubstantiated.