Big brother is watching you w*nk 128 comments
diminuendo
· 4 years ago
I'll use the bomb scenario to set up the final points of my argument. Let's say that we have Person C who orders the detonation of a bomb from a room with no means of observing the outside world. For the sake of the argument, we'll assume that Person C is the direct agent and is not being forced to deliver the order. From here, we have four divergent possibilities. The first is that Person C intended to harm as many people as possible. Here, we can claim that Person C has direct moral responsibility for the harm they caused since it was their direct intention.
Big brother is watching you w*nk 128 comments
diminuendo
· 4 years ago
From a causal point of view, the scenario of ordering the detonation of a bomb and that of endorsing someone's statement are somewhat compatible. In the case of the latter scenario, I'll grant the idea that a great number of people will be led to believe that the endorsed person is a good source of knowledge. If the endorsed person is morally corrupt and goes on to manipulate people into committing some of the worst atrocities of human history, then we can use a causal analysis to conclude that it would have been better if the endorsement had not been made. Of course, this is rather specific, but I will make the claim that the moral responsibility of the outcomes in both scenarios are very different.
Big brother is watching you w*nk 128 comments
diminuendo
· 4 years ago
... not in any way versed in psychology insofar as social engineering. But I believe that even with this added element, we would not be responsible for granting Person A any authority over any topic that encompasses Statement X. This is a problem on the accuser's end, and so we are not burdened by any responsibility. Any attempts at saddling us with the bogus claim that we've made any claim remotely similar to "Person A is an expert on Matter Y" is easily dismissible. The specific construction of our claim may come to question, but if the argument truly comes down to semantics rather than the logic, then I think we already know who has the more solid argument in that instance.
1
Big brother is watching you w*nk 128 comments
diminuendo
· 4 years ago
Days late, but... @guest_ I would be irresponsible to leave a specific statement of yours alone. The specific claim I want to tackle is that "[there] is a thin line between agreeing with something a person says and giving them a platform and reinforcing their status as a person to be listened to." I will put forward the argument that there is no such thin line, and in fact the line does not exist. The two issues you bring forward are entirely different in nature. The positive claim that "Statement X from Person A is correct" is an entirely different claim than "Person A is an expert on Matter Y." The former merely acknowledges that Person A has made a correct statement, the latter grants that Person A is well-versed enough to be "given a platform," so to speak. We may, of course, enter the rather dubious psychological terrain of arguing that the former has the possibility of granting the latter given particular elements, something I will choose not to argue for or against since I am...
1
The language of science is mathematics 3 comments
diminuendo
· 4 years ago
The "work" treats + as a variable for an unknown object that follows the law of cancellation, though concluding that the symbol for addition could possibly be made to work that way isn't a workable solution anyways.
1
Cdc approved 34 comments
diminuendo
· 4 years ago
Perhaps the children are not at a high risk of death, but that does not exclude the risk of permanent health complications. As a note, the flu is not particularly deadly, but given the right conditions it can lead to pneumonia and other bacterial infections.
6
brendhalt 19 comments
diminuendo
· 4 years ago
...every trial (I'm making a very large generalization-- not all studies are like this, but the texts suggest that this is the style of study that they should be aiming for). For this sort of study, the results would have to be announced when the analysis is done. More so to the point, this person should be given a chance to confirm whether or not they wish to hear of the results after the analysis has been compiled in a readable format. Assuming that this is in fact an attempt at a genuine study, this is both unethical and amateurish at best. Of course, I doubt that there was any study involved in this interaction, at least not a serious one.
3
brendhalt 19 comments
diminuendo
· 4 years ago
Irony aside, this "test" or "study" (whichever it is, it cannot be both in the context provided by the text) is deeply flawed for two primary reasons. The first is that the person involved never volunteered. All things aside, without proper authorization on the "boyfriend's" part, this is an ethical violation. The participants should first be allowed a chance to confirm whether they consent to the study, and then must be given some information related to the study. They don't necessarily need to be told the exact nature of the study if doing so compromises the results, but at the very least consent must be had and some information must be given. The fact that neither was presumably provided is a glaring indicator that this is not a genuine test, or at least not one that would pass by modern ethical standards. The second is that the "result" was explained almost immediately afterwards. This is not what a study is. A study is a collection of data for analysis upon the conclusion of...
7
Them "gender studies" curriculum 29 comments
diminuendo
· 4 years ago
It could be the case that I'm confusing a particular categorical requirement with gender studies specifically. My apologies.
My weeb ass when I hear the pope is touring Asia 9 comments
diminuendo
· 4 years ago
Christianity was never widely accepted in Japan, so they tend to be more cutthroat when it comes to how they view the religion. Just comparing Christianity to the other prevailing religions (Buddhism and Shintoism) makes it pretty clear that Christianity is the more extreme flavor of religious belief, since it attempts to coerce a very particular style of life by the apparent authority of an all-powerful being.
·
Edited 4 years ago
School problems 5 comments
diminuendo
· 4 years ago
While I agree that there should be more lesson options available for things such as learning how to handle personal finances efficiently, those shouldn't outright replace calculus/trig classes. Calculus still has its place for students who want to reach that level of math for their career choice. Education should not be limited to the level of knowledge that the "average" person needs.
Them "gender studies" curriculum 29 comments
diminuendo
· 4 years ago
Most colleges in the U.S. that promote a "liberal experience" DO require all students to take at least one gender studies course.
2
Asia got corona doe 17 comments
diminuendo
· 4 years ago
As much as I enjoy dark humor, there's no even comparison between the price of a glass of water to the life of a child. Any person who would make that comparison as if the two ideas were somehow equivalent, even as a reply to a joke, needs to reevaluate their internal scales.
3
Look at those abs though. 14 comments
diminuendo
· 4 years ago
...the exact ways a prophet may (including departing knowledge of the future upon His apostles and disciples, one of the most famous perhaps being to predict His own execution). In classification alone, I could still call Jesus a prophet and I would not be wrong, since He acts no differently from the prophets preceding Him.
1
Look at those abs though. 14 comments
diminuendo
· 4 years ago
Even if Jesus claims he is the son of God (or God Himself), it doesn't erase the fact that he does all of the things I've listed. On the null hypothesis that he is a human character in history, he qualifies as a prophet.
.
For a moment, I'll entertain the positive hypothesis that Jesus is not even just the son of God, but God himself. Then what we have is a divine figure who descended to earth, and not even refer to Himself in the first person. Instead, He repeatedly asserts that He is the Son of Man, and moreover that God (supposedly Himself) acts through Him. What we have is a divine being, supposedly timeless in His wisdom, who acts as if He weren't Himself. He *insists* on acting as if he were an avatar of Himself, and goes as far as to offer Himself to Himself on the crucifix. He would *still* be acting in precisely the ways I described, even if He were speaking for Himself. Since he acts in...
1
.
For a moment, I'll entertain the positive hypothesis that Jesus is not even just the son of God, but God himself. Then what we have is a divine figure who descended to earth, and not even refer to Himself in the first person. Instead, He repeatedly asserts that He is the Son of Man, and moreover that God (supposedly Himself) acts through Him. What we have is a divine being, supposedly timeless in His wisdom, who acts as if He weren't Himself. He *insists* on acting as if he were an avatar of Himself, and goes as far as to offer Himself to Himself on the crucifix. He would *still* be acting in precisely the ways I described, even if He were speaking for Himself. Since he acts in...
I hate new severs 11 comments
diminuendo
· 4 years ago
To quote a friend of mine with regards to the kinds of people who would be offended by gendered language and seek to censor such apparently offensive language, "You can parody them all you want, but you'll always find that your parodies will pale in comparison to what they promote or condone."
3
Be nice 10 comments
diminuendo
· 4 years ago
For some reason I imagined Ainsworth doing this to Chise and the comic became awkwardly cute.
2
Look at those abs though. 14 comments
diminuendo
· 4 years ago
Jesus is absolutely a prophet. He speaks on the behalf of God, performs and fulfills divine predictions, and was given direct esoteric knowledge of which it was his duty to pass to other people. Any disciple who talks on his behalf, on the other hand, is not a prophet since they do not have the direct knowledge/experience that Jesus had from God.
2
title 2 comments
diminuendo
· 4 years ago
At what point can you even call it love before you call it manipulation? A situation in which one looks like a hostage while in an apparently loving relationship does not seem like a situation in which one is actually in a loving relationship to me.
7
