This is a dark indicator
03.11.2025 22:31
👍 2
🔁 0
💬 0
📌 0
This is a dark indicator
Started this “hidden gem” last night, pretty good!
Most mornings I have an apple juice with creatine and in my head I'm like "wow this is so healthy"
Hahahaha
Rawls pile getting thick af
My theory of just war is that we just shouldn’t war.
Wow Donald Davidson rocks
You’re leaking my SQUIDS vanity plate smh
Richard Rorty was a 21st century philosopher stuck in the 20th century responding to the philosophy of the 19th century.
BREAKING: Bezos buys two of the remaining four, announces they will only be publishing material on the inherent natural beauty of the free market from now on.
Spending the past month or so in Southern California has helped me realize that Stephen Miller must truly be a psychopath (he grew up here) because the best thing about this place BY FAR is the Mexican food.
A treat?
Rorty has to be the funniest American philosopher of all time, right?
On the Bad App I got FLAMED for this take a couple of years ago
‘Your priors too Bayesian’ has the juice
I am a proud owner of the issue of Philosophy and Public Affairs with Peter Singer’s “Famine, Affluence, and Morality” paper in it.
Two awesome used bookstore finds:
We are not on the right hand side of the laffer curve.
Wondering why conservatives keep blaming John Rawls for not understanding how birth works?
Looking for an intuitive explanation of the original position?
Check out my most recent substack post!
open.substack.com/pub/grapheme...
I didn’t forget anything!
Guess we’ve learned the answer!
You guys need to start saying this to people irl. I say it to people and it’s like they’ve never heard the idea before in their life. Stop slacking!
The thing about taxes is that they need to be way higher
They have a versions of Reese’s peanut butter cups which is a chocolate bar and good golly miss molly it is good
This took me out
Yes!!!!! Yes!!!!
I’m finally reading a theory of justice, and frankly I don’t understand at this point why we’re not all rawlsian. Seems he cracked the nut no
Kant argues that if we’re not to loathe the human race, we must believe it’s our natural end to morally progress; and further, that like progress towards “aerostatic balloons,” repeated failure to reach our end doesn’t justify abandoning hope—only demonstrated impossibility does.
Rawls argues that your place in the natural distribution of talents is *morally arbitrary,* so justice should be assessed from the *point of view* of the original position, where you imagine not to know who you’ll be.
It’s not about the literal possibility of being someone else!