PavlovsCat

18 ms·

31.
by PavlovsCat 7y ago
> One-off snide attacks in a comment section without any evidence or argument to back it up offers nothing of value. Can you back that up? Here's the comment: > You guys really get high on your own supply don't you? It'
32.
by PavlovsCat 7y ago
> Order is the tide of creation, but yours is a species that worships the one over the many. You glorify your intelligence because it allows you to believe anything. That you have a destiny. That you have a right. That you have a cause.
33.
by PavlovsCat 7y ago
https://onemileatatime.com/berlin-brandenburg-airport/ > In 2014 it was revealed that Alfredo di Mauro, the chief planner for the airport’s fire protection system, was not a qualified engineer but an engineering dra
34.
by PavlovsCat 7y ago
Well, it's not just years, every day of that means money that gets shifted. I couldn't find the article I read years ago about one of the companies involved, and their string of similar projects in other countries, but here's
35.
by PavlovsCat 7y ago
> it is certainly worth examining to see what it can do for us today. Then do that, who's stopping you? You just asked "what if" and then expected me to do it for you.
36.
by PavlovsCat 7y ago
Well yeah, it's hard to talk about proving love or disproving love either way. But if you have compassion to one person, do you not have, in theory, the capability of compassion towards all? If you can enjoy the quirks of one nation, a
37.
by PavlovsCat 7y ago
> Can you give an example where I do and must judge facts differently depending on the flag they exist under? Well, to be a "the negative kind of nationalist". If nationalism is just the idea that nations should exist, and any
38.
by PavlovsCat 7y ago
Noam Chomsky about the lack of continuity: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5meC4Z61qGg&t=15m45s
39.
by PavlovsCat 7y ago
The "social norm of being connected"? Hmm. I seriously doubt the bandwidth of emojis and oneliners, so to me that's like looking down on someone for not having 10 watches drawn with marker on each arm, because they obviously
40.
by PavlovsCat 7y ago
> I don't see the logic in this, even though it seems to be supportive of my concerns. The way I interpret it is that if you remove everything but the lowest common denominator, to achieve the "ultimate unity" of everybody
41.
by PavlovsCat 7y ago
> for example, thinking of people as having mental health defects I asked you how you would convince Trump, as an example of a specific individual we both "know". Your answer is to study someone else, to just assume I haven&#x2
42.
by PavlovsCat 7y ago
> Tribalism is inherent to the human psyche. So is rejection of tribalism, so that doesn't really say anything.
43.
by PavlovsCat 7y ago
> it concerns me that no one seems to worry about whether we're losing some valuable things with the ongoing cultural homogenization of the planet. This quote is for you then. > From a philosophical viewpoint, the danger inheren
44.
by PavlovsCat 7y ago
> Thinking negatively of other countries is not necessary Judging the same facts differently depending on the flag they exist under is necessary for what is under discussion here. Where that doesn't apply, this discussion doesn&#x
45.
by PavlovsCat 7y ago
> I am grateful to my ancestors and countrymen for their self-sacrifice I say "constructed identity", you say "I am grateful". If you twist my words to call them insane, that in itself says a lot about the security of
46.
by PavlovsCat 7y ago
There probably is also an evolutionary reason for rape to exist, does that mean rape is fine? Why is the present not also part of evolution, why does something that "evolved in the past" have to be protected from criticism in this
47.
by PavlovsCat 7y ago
> This sounds like you're saying that it's not possible for a Chinese or Japanese person to love their own country more than they love other countries. If so, do you have any evidence that supports this belief? Do you have evid
48.
by PavlovsCat 7y ago
Well, I wouldn't have put it that way, and I'm not that poster, so it's useless to get stuck to that word. Personally I don't mind the artificiality of countries, but the insanity of the identities some people (artificia
49.
by PavlovsCat 7y ago
> Just as love for one individual which excludes the love for others is not love, love for one's country which is not part of one's love for humanity is not love, but idolatrous worship. -- Erich Fromm I would say the person
50.
by PavlovsCat 7y ago
I don't "go around dismissing things as artificial", you're just playing word games. It's obvious from context how they meant it, "artificial" is just not a good way to say it. Anyone who truly rejects &qu
51.
by PavlovsCat 7y ago
I don't compare with (our stories of) the past, I compare with the faint inkling I have of what ought to be, the injustice and squandered potential I see right now. Furthermore there is the road we're on and the cliff it ends at:
52.
by PavlovsCat 7y ago
To get an idea, start by giving your laptop a name ascribing intent and fate to it, and seeing people as a product of your laptop, rather than the other way around.
53.
by PavlovsCat 7y ago
> Democracy doesn't restrain people, really? Not socially, not when it comes to the individual relations. I didn't mean convicing or voting are pointless, but it's not the end-all, be-all. It works for the lucky cases, but
54.
by PavlovsCat 7y ago
> the current approach of simplistic, repetitive, and often technically incorrect news articles and half-informed scolding by politicians That's not "the" current approach, that's your selective perception and/or
55.
by PavlovsCat 7y ago
I agree, I was being sarcastic. I find this overly flowery and passive language more dishonest than polite, because it means the same thing, but with added plausible deniability/indirection, and more useless work for the reader. "
56.
by PavlovsCat 7y ago
> How would you phrase that ? Maybe " I am not entirely sure I feel convinced that nobody would disagree with this description providing sufficient convergence with what might be argued is a valid way to interpret reality ". Or
57.
by PavlovsCat 7y ago
https://hn.algolia.com/?q=debunked Seems to be used all the time for things that aren't a scam, a hoax, a lie or something like that. This is one of the example sentences Mirriam-Webster gives for the word debunk: >
58.
by PavlovsCat 7y ago
Yes, but you don't have to "manufacture" consent to, say, assault being illegal in anyone but sociopaths. That's the differnce. It's like saying "discussing in good faith and bashing our skulls in are actually
59.
by PavlovsCat 7y ago
> I'll invoke him if he's relevant. No, you're trying to speak for him. Consent to, say, physical assault being illegal, is a whole different ball game than manufactured consent to the Vietnam War, and all that is entailed
60.
by PavlovsCat 7y ago
Don't invoke Chomsky for this nonsense. > What has been created by this half century of massive corporate propaganda is what's called "anti-politics". So that anything that goes wrong, you blame the government. Well o

More ›