Support? Nah, that's rare to the point of non-existence. I completely agree with your second sentence and I think people who are not willing to make the concession from the first half because of the second, substituting Hamas for ISIS, are doing themselves and Palestinians a massive disservice. Explanations are not excuses, and the behavior of both Israel and Hamas in the modern era cannot be excused.
I’ve never said that people should ignore any attempt at logic and just focus on their passions, but the modern cult of rationality and stoicism is ironically hugely lacking in self-awareness and rationality.
I've never said that people should ignore any attempt at passion and just focus on their logic, but the modern mobs of righteous indignation and fury are ironically hugely lacking in empathy, tolerance (not of intolerance, before that gets tossed at me), and pragmatism.
I agree that we mostly seem to be on the same page, but I really need to stress that I have not asked people to be soulless and I think that's a mischaracterization of my asking for people to set their passion aside as much as possible as an exercise which is inherently temporary. We're both just looking for balance here.
Yes, of course, but there are degrees of engagement with politics. I still think this route is worth pursuing, but there will be a not insignificant number of his supporters turned from reluctant to passionate over this as they (incorrectly, stupidly) perceive it to be a governmental attack on their preferred candidate. Trump had his best fundraising day of this year the day of the conviction. There's a lot of political math behind whether you think it will galvanize Biden's supporters more or if you think it will increase reluctance for Trump with independents, both of which I think are true. I wouldn't fault someone for coming to either conclusion really and I think you would need harder polling numbers (that I'm sure Biden's team has) to really make an informed decision.
Genuine question, does anyone have any better suggestions that can be implemented in a reasonable timeframe? Immigration is a bad economic target for so many reasons, but Americans overwhelmingly view it as a critical issue. When 1 in 5 of your citizens, regardless of party, considers it the most pressing issue right now in an election year and it is the thumping drum of your opponent, you're going to be under a lot of pressure to act. I don't want this EO to happen but I kind of have to be willing to say I'm in the vast minority in my country, evidently. This is a social/educational problem to solve first, I think.
Agreed. I thought the bit on "values-based" and "practicals-based" alliances was interesting. Diplomacy is overwhelmingly complex and I'm glad I'm no diplomat, for my own sanity.
We've hit the 24 hour mark and I don't think this thread is going anywhere productive. I think you and I just have some deeply-held beliefs or ethics that are opposed here. For what it's worth, we completely agree on who Donald Trump is and the horrific actions he's taken over his lifetime. The lies, the fraud, the assaults, all of it. I do get frustrated that more people don't see that, but where we split is what we're willing to see society do to solve it. There's a lot of complexity there and I don't deny that there would be benefits to your more hardline approach. I just think it would have irreversible, terrible consequences for our media landscape, and subsequently the entire American constituency, after Trump is gone.
It's unfortunate that we weren't able to find common ground, but I respect your convictions, genuinely.
I read the article you posted here (great read btw, thanks for posting) and I think just to quibble, that idea of lift (Bernoulli's Theorem) is not wrong, just insufficient. It sounds like that mechanism definitely contributes to the overall generated lift, but doesn't tell the whole story.
I really enjoyed the bit about Einstein designing an aerofoil and when it was tested, the pilot said the plane "waddled like a pregnant duck". Really interesting to see one of the smartest physicists to ever live just kinda give up on aeronautics and consider it a "youthful folly".
This was a cool read, thanks for posting! That final bit about experiments on both the color and sound while chewing also affecting flavor is super interesting.
Ugh this sucks, but no, not really. LinkedIn isn't just a platform, it's the people on it. No other site exists that will get you the same amount of exposure. There are definitely other sites and non-internet options for networking in general though.
Big win for non-Hindu, non-nationalist people in India. This is going to do a lot to blunt the worst of Modi's intent. Also, the polls proved to be super off-base. I wonder where that discrepancy came from? Could just be heightened enthusiasm on voting day or something, but it's always interesting when polls miss the mark heavily.
I'm with you, I was leaning toward him embracing it as well. It'll be interesting to see how the campaign walks that rope, especially with Trump's campaign throwing darts at him the whole time.
This guy is living the game dev dream. Built his project that's relatively simple as far as upkeep goes (which is full credit to him for building it that way), a darling in the industry, and he's just independent. He's working on other cool stuff at his own pace with no need to placate any audience or publisher. It's beautiful.
Interesting. There's been a lot of competing discussion around Biden about how much he should embrace Trump's conviction for his campaigning. I was a bit torn as well, only because him emphasizing it could play into the "rigged" narrative and potentially galvanize the opposition. Obviously though, there is a benefit to campaigning on it as well. Looks like Biden has made a decision on it.
I'm just not sure I've gotten my point across to you bc93. I'm not asking anyone to become an emotionless automation. That's of course a nightmarish outcome. That's full logic, no passion. Bad. In that same exact manner, all passion, no logic is also horrible. The history of people who have done that is also extremely dark. Nobody is advocating for either of those though!
When I tell someone to "put yourself in someone else's shoes", I am not asking them to lose their sense of self or to base their final decision entirely on that other person. It's a thought mechanism we use to emphasize our sense of empathy, which gives us a new perspective that we fold into our amalgamation of ideas.
I'm not asking for anyone to turn their emotions off forever, or even deluded enough to think you can do that fully at all, in the same way that I don't expect anyone to fully convert their brain into another person's to empathize. It doesn't matter, it's still a useful exercise in part.
That's all I'm asking for. There is a lot of nuance and complexity to all situations, and passion is blinding. I'm not a Buddhist, but they have a concept of Bonno, those passions that inspire us to actions that harm ourselves or others. I don't think Buddhists are quite on the same level as Ben Shapiro and the Nazis just because they recognize that passion can be blinding.
Support? Nah, that's rare to the point of non-existence. I completely agree with your second sentence and I think people who are not willing to make the concession from the first half because of the second, substituting Hamas for ISIS, are doing themselves and Palestinians a massive disservice. Explanations are not excuses, and the behavior of both Israel and Hamas in the modern era cannot be excused.