If Mort Divine ruled the world

[Einherjar86]

I'm going to ignore the latter statement because we aren't talking about that. We are talking about absence, not forced overabundance.

Sorry, I took your comment about computers being a bad thing to be implying that we can have too many computers, or too much computerization.

It is true that if computers all suddenly vanished many people would die. That's precisely why I hold my position - computers are important, which makes what keeps them available and working even more critical. The computer is the modern human's "kingdom lost". So I'm interested in things like nails and shoes. I'm not interested in calling a nail something different because reasons.

But a lot of people are interested in it. There's no universal metric of importance to be found in the geological layers of the earth. Importance derives from social conversations about what things mean to us at any given moment. You can say "Without oxygen, we couldn't even be having this conversation!" But that's pretty irrelevant to the matter itself.

Like with computers, erasing language entirely would be a catastrophe, but not human-erasing, like the erasing of oxygen would be (in around 4-26 minutes). Language also isn't homogeneous. There are many languages. So I'm also interested in what happens with the inability to communicate due to language differences. Also, it's true, one can't test for rottenness in modern bridges without not only language, but a stack of complex knowledge of math and materials.

Absolutely (although mathematics is also a language). Mathematics, raw materials, and non-computational language are all equally important for building bridges. Assigning greater or lesser value according to "fundamentals" is non-provable and non-empirical.

 

[Dak]

But a lot of people are interested in it. There's no universal metric of importance to be found in the geological layers of the earth. Importance derives from social conversations about what things mean to us at any given moment. You can say "Without oxygen, we couldn't even be having this conversation!" But that's pretty irrelevant to the matter itself.

Absolutely (although mathematics is also a language). Mathematics, raw materials, and non-computational language are all equally important for building bridges. Assigning greater or lesser value according to "fundamentals" is non-provable and non-empirical.

I agree that importance isn't "universal" because things fluctuate and change across time (such as which materials, what math, what language, in this example), not to mention plenty of people have ignorant and/or high time preference based value systems (like people who rank relabeling as highly important). I'm not sure why you keep pushing for valuations to either be universal or if not therefore fraudulent or baseless. Everyone places higher or lower values on things, even you, despite claims to the contrary. Since all decisions regarding behavior involve opportunity cost, regardless of claims to value everything equally, one simply cannot actually value everything equally, and I'm arguing that there are in fact good reasons to weight values towards something like actually functioning roads and bridges and away from whose name gets slapped on them.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

PoliticalCompass.com has always been a joke but lmao, this is the best one yet

 

[Einherjar86]

I agree that importance isn't "universal" because things fluctuate and change across time (such as which materials, what math, what language, in this example), not to mention plenty of people have ignorant and/or high time preference based value systems (like people who rank relabeling as highly important). I'm not sure why you keep pushing for valuations to either be universal or if not therefore fraudulent or baseless. Everyone places higher or lower values on things, even you, despite claims to the contrary.

I don't think I claimed that I don't place higher and lower values on things. I said (or implied) that I don't attribute "natural" or pre-experiential values to things. I definitely value things differently, but those evaluations derive from considerations of what things mean to me in a given context and moment.

And I'm not saying that values are either universal or fraudulent/baseless. In fact, I explicitly said the opposite: things are meaningful. I took issue with what I perceived to be your attempt to ground values in a kind of positivist hierarchy. That doesn't mean your values are baseless.

 

[Dak]

I don't think I claimed that I don't place higher and lower values on things. I said (or implied) that I don't attribute "natural" or pre-experiential values to things. I definitely value things differently, but those evaluations derive from considerations of what things mean to me in a given context and moment.

Well I did state/agree with the fact that you value things differently/differentially, but you also stated that all things that go into bridge building matter equally. I suppose that you could say that you value bridges differently than other things, but not things that go into bridge-building. But that's not how valuations work, as nothing solely goes into bridge-building. Maybe you didn't consider that point, and would wish to amend your point here; however this is - while a valuable example - also getting caught up in minutiae. I consider the existence of (good) bridges more important than the symbolic naming of bridges, or the symbolic naming of other things.

And I'm not saying that values are either universal or fraudulent/baseless. In fact, I explicitly said the opposite: things are meaningful. I took issue with what I perceived to be your attempt to ground values in a kind of positivist hierarchy. That doesn't mean your values are baseless.

I don't see my positions as representations or examples of positivism, but I can see how my defense might have given that impression. I don't see them as "value-free", but I do see them as superior in a high/low time preference dichotomy/continuum conflict.

 

[Einherjar86]

Well I did state/agree with the fact that you value things differently/differentially, but you also stated that all things that go into bridge building matter equally.

They all do matter equally--absent anyone evaluating them. I took you to be saying that some things just are more valuable when it comes to bridge-building. I was saying that what matters for bridge-builders depends on the bridge-builder and on the context of any given bridge being built.

 

[Dak]

They all do matter equally--absent anyone evaluating them. I took you to be saying that some things just are more valuable when it comes to bridge-building. I was saying that what matters for bridge-builders depends on the bridge-builder and on the context of any given bridge being built.

Well that clarifies some points of disagreement, and maybe I wasn't clear enough. Of course evaluations require not only an evaluator, but other relavent information that must be evaluated. But this is when we zoom into bridges specifically, or to some other thing specifically. I stated that what I mean scales down, but it also scales up. Referring back to the originating disagreement again, and referencing opportunity cost, the Berkeley city council spending time debating labels rather than addressing more concrete concerns is a disservice not only to the general public via things like bridges and roads (with infrastructure being a thing always thrown in the face of libertarians), but also low-income/racial minority persons who will see no dollar-based benefit in these policies.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Have heard about this story over the last several days but just ignored it at the time. lmfao this video. I think it's ironic that so many Democrats blame Reagan for shuttering the asylums when the initial reason people wanted them closed was that blacks were being disproportionately interred over diagnoses of schizophrenia.

 

[Dak]

I'm not sure what schizophrenia has to do with the Thomas Hate Hoax.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

She seems extremely delusional and unhinged to me based on that video, massive persecution complex. But maybe it's just 100% narcissism, I dunno, I'm not a shrink.

 

[Dak]

She seems extremely delusional and unhinged to me based on that video, massive persecution complex. But maybe it's just 100% narcissism, I dunno, I'm not a shrink.

Just looks like personality problems and probably not exactly the highest IQ. Says she studied at a "Seventh Day Adventist HBCU" (lol), but doesn't say she even graduated. Cognitive limitations and consuming intellectual garbage along with AA policies can go a long way towards the development of delusions that aren't psychotic.

 

[Blurry_Dreams]

Based on what?

kavanaugh "sexual predator" - Google Search

 

[CiG]

kavanaugh "sexual predator" - Google Search

You think it's "pretty obvious he's a sexual predator" based on a Google search? That's embarrassing.

 

[Blurry_Dreams]

You think it's "pretty obvious he's a sexual predator" based on a Google search? That's embarrassing.

no
i did the google-search because all of my friends think that "he should have been put into prison instead of making supreme court justice"

do you not remember when this shit happened??

all those people who got freaked the fuck out when he officially got the job of being supreme court justice??

 

[Dak]

RBG says he's a great guy.

 

[Blurry_Dreams]

Donald Trump thinks RBG is senile

but Donald Trump is a misogynistic jack-ass who might be senile himself

 

[Dak]

Nice non-sequitur you've got there. Would be a shame if someone called it out.

 

[Einherjar86]

That’d be like calling out a zebra for having stripes.

 

[Oblivious Maximus]

Every time I think a fatal venereal disease contracted via crack whore feet has finally taken effect, I'm consistently let down.

 

[CiG]

but Donald Trump is a misogynistic jack-ass who might be senile himself

What did he do or say that makes him misogynistic? The "grab 'em by the pussy" comment that pales in comparison to what most males on this very site have said, including you? So many males project when it comes to Trump and his supposed sexism.

no
i did the google-search because all of my friends think that "he should have been put into prison instead of making supreme court justice"

do you not remember when this shit happened??

all those people who got freaked the fuck out when he officially got the job of being supreme court justice??

You're a moron.