4 ms·
Do you see what you did here? Someone comes up with a hypothesis that is scientific and not a moral question, and you succeed in politicizing and moralizing it
by pokemongoaway 10y ago
Do you see what you did here? Someone comes up with a hypothesis that is scientific and not a moral question, and you succeed in politicizing and moralizing it in one fell swoop. Why is it important to derail this line of questioning? If government and welfare systems effect the organization of families, relationships, reproduction, courtship - and the like - then isn't that a worthy thing to study?
- vertex-four 10y agoActually, the GP made a pretty blatant assertion, not "we should study this" but "this is the way I believe it is".
- pokemongoaway 10y ago"blatant assertion..." Blatant: (of bad behavior) done openly and unashamedly. Assertion: a confident and forceful statement of fact or belief. Are you implying that we should be closed and/or ashamed of beliefs we might hold in this category of discourse?
- vertex-four 10y agoNope. I'm implying that trying to suggest an assertion that affects political discourse and thus real people's lives is "just a scientific hypothesis" is not on.
- pokemongoaway 10y agoYou just don't seem to be able to take any nuance without failing. My comment wasn't about what you put in quotes - I don't know who you're quoting.
- watwut 10y agoIt was not scientific hypothesis nor proposal for research, it was statement of opinion presented as fact.
- pokemongoaway 10y agoI'm not sure how fearing that universal basic income would significantly decrease monogamous relationships is opinion presented as far. I'm not going to defend this other commenter, but it is a reasonable topic that I don't like to see get derailed so easily.