I believe this is the article that kicked off support for the idea. Thankfully it’s not a Medium-requires-an-account article

Thank you, that’s one I’m going to read.

“Toxic masculinity,” for instance, a lot of people misunderstand to mean that masculinity is toxic.

Whatt‽‽ ϞϞ(๑⚈ ○ ⚈๑) I thought I was practicing the non toxic version of masculinity!

But I don’t know if this challenge to them is the same as a challenge to Popper.

Well, thanks for the link, in any case. My reading comprehension and analytic skills aren’t completely undeveloped, and while I’ve been known to fall for brief periods for clever sounding schemes*, I’m generally skeptical enough to read between the lines.

I think I have to admit I don’t actually know what Popper has to say on the matter. Though, I get the impression these two authors might agree, at least broadly, and are simply viewing the same problem through different lenses.

He wasn’t the first, but he was the first to really coin the term that stuck. It’s hard to read, if for no other reason than it’s philosophy and my eyes tend to glaze over.

That is, resolving the paradox might be interesting to someone if paradoxes bother them

Yeah, I think it’s a paradox only to absolutists, and I distrust absolutists. There are physical laws of nature that are absolute, and even then we find exceptions; but trying to hold to philosophical absolutes leads to people like Ayn Rand, and Libertarians. So, to paraphrase possibly the best scene in any movie ever, “the code is more what you call guidelines, than actual rules”.

• I once thought flat tax was a great idea, believing it’d get us closer to European-style “finally I don’t have to sorry about this shit for two while months every year” taxes; before a friend pointed out the disproportionate impact a flat tax has on different economic stratuses. Stratusi? Whatever.

Is there a source for that response? It sounds good, and I’d like to read a reasoned argument for the paraphrase.

That’s a decent solution. I was referring to The Paradox of Tolerance. You can disagree with Popper, but it’ll take more that a couple of sentences in Lemme to convince me.

So, you’re on favor of enslaving robots.

Duly noted, H-#1D0146641.

My problem is that I absolutely loath gardening. I love the gardens; I hate the upkeep. Weeding, tending, watering, repotting, fertilizing, pruning… I’d rather clean toilets. It’s so hard on my back, I’m miserable being outside when it’s hot or humid, and we don’t control the weather.

Someone’s taking care of all that. It’s lovely… if it’s someone else.

The Paradox of Tolerance says intolerance must not be tolerated.

Crush them. Brutally, if necessary.

It’s the angle. Can you hold your weight with your arms straight out to the sides? Sure, you can do push-ups, but can you do this?

or this?

Most people can’t.

That’s not how I meant it.

There’s a cultural value in virginity in girls. It’s pretty common across cultures: for marriage, virgin women are more desirable than non-virgins. It’s biased; the virginity only increases value for girls, and it probably stems from men wanting to be sure than any prodigy are actually theirs. Women can be nearly 100% sure a kid they have is theirs (not quite 100%, as there’s a brief period when a channeling swap could conceivably be made), but the men can never be certain. The best odds you have is to get yourself a virgin. So female virginity has been valued through history (by men), and I think this is where the fetish of having sex with virgins comes from.

That’s what I’m taking about. I’ve never understood the appeal of “being a girl’s/boy’s first.”

I have never, ever, understood the appeal of virginity. Who prefers someone who is uncomfortable, awkward, and doesn’t have any experience?

This has always baffled me. This is one reason why I think sex workers should hold a high status in society: they provide an valuable service in training the uninitiated and unskilled. It’s like taking tennis lessons, and all your future partners should be grateful for their lessons.

Man I hope there’s a brace across his back, because a human’s arms are not strong enough to overcome that much resistance.

But it there were a sturdy brace, that looks like almost enough resistance to keep him from dying, if he can keep from tumbling. Which he probably can’t.

Yeah, that guy’s best outcome is a lot of broken bones.

Ah, but I agree with you! It’s commendable that we care for our weak who would otherwise die.

The other wolf, though, thinks there’s a good chance the stupid are going to drive us to extinction.

Thanks for not taking offense when you legitimately could have. Reason 1 why Lemmy > Reddit.

Maybe? Natural selection seems to work for the rest of everything in nature. But humans are special, aren’t we? Above nature; different rules apply to us, nature itself treats us differently.

I do agree that humans are fundamentally different in that more of our individual value is learned than inherited. OTOH, more of our value is learned than inherited, and that’s where the problem lies. It’s not there genes, it’s the parents and the parenting. I’m not suggesting we’ll improve humanity by removing stupidity through evolution; I’m saying there are a lot of people who I don’t believe are fit to raise children. And there’s a corpus of examples that could support that argument; how about that guy who literally shook his infant to death last week? Good father, him?

I’m not a parent myself, and I will never be one. Maybe I’d make a good father, maybe not. But I’m not breeding, so taking me out doesn’t affect the gene pool; I’m not playing in the gene pool.

And, no, I did not misunderstand the point. What I said was that if I could get a guarantee that others would also be removed, I’d volunteer to be in the group.

That was hyperbole, BTW; if I really believed it, I’d go to a Trump rally with a bunch of C4 and ball bearings wrapped around my torso. Even if I were an Einstein, it’d be a net benefit to humanity.

Dude. If I could guarantee that my sacrifice would also remove some N>1 number of dumbshits who shouldn’t be contributing to the ecological load the Earth’s ecosystem is bearing, I’d volunteer.

The Idiocracy intro got a lot of things right.

At first I read “Portland,” saw my mistake, shrugged and thought, “either way.”

I’ve never been to Poland. I’m sure it’s nicer than Portland.

Few abilities will protect you from muggings as the ability to squirt substances from your ass on demand.

That only means there are whole generations who haven’t yet seen it!

I love this idea so much.

Aww, 'cmon, man! At least add a “spoiler alert!”

Jeez.

The ribbon is what makes it classy.

I admit, I made that assumption when I read “gluten”, too.

Thing is, back in oelden days, people with these sorts of allergies wouldn’t survive long enough to procreate. We’re breeding a species of increasingly fragile people - but that’s what is best about us, IMO: we take care of our weak. With any luck, gene editing will get to the point that it doesn’t matter what genetic defect you were born with; we’ll just tailor a cure, and everyone will have a chance.

It surprises me there’s a non-cyliac gluten allergy; gluten is what allowed us to create agricultural societies - I thought that’d been bred out long ago.

“Bred.” Ah-ha. Ah-ha.