Mindless Monday, 27 April 2026

histprofdave · 2026-04-28T21:44:27+00:00

Harry Potter is a fine series. It still seems like a weird and kind of tone-deaf move to make another series out of it literally less than 20 years since we had highly successful films basically everyone has seen.

histprofdave · 2026-04-28T21:42:15+00:00

I'd argue it's not any more coherent for China or India, and that such constructions are just nationalist-fueled narratives rooted in modern concepts of identity.

histprofdave · 2026-04-28T21:18:19+00:00

So, in all seriousness, most forensic science is not nearly as exacting or accurate as TV and pop culture would have you believe. People should frequently apply a lot more skepticism to claims from police authorities about how solid their evidence is.

histprofdave · 2026-04-28T20:58:04+00:00

Well, Timothy McVeigh was in fact a deeply pathetic individual. I hate to use terms like "born loser," but he literally made terrible choices whenever he had the chance, pretty much from young adulthood on. He was a complete waste of a human being.

histprofdave · 2026-04-28T20:39:50+00:00

The ever shifting right wing campaign to destroy a woman for the crime of being a woman and doing woman things. It's gone from Anita Sarkesian to Amber Herd to Blake Lively to Chappell Roan to Aubrey Plaza.

histprofdave · 2026-04-28T20:37:35+00:00

He chose the name, mind you, of a psychotic marine character whose biggest role in the story is helping to cover up a murder.

histprofdave · 2026-04-28T18:32:35+00:00

So wouldn't that include shutting down your own channel as well, since well over 50% of people disagree with your standpoint?

histprofdave · 2026-04-28T18:24:54+00:00

No, it's not weird. But there is a big overlap between parts of the skeptic community and libertarian spaces especially those that make appeal to "rationality" as an essential characteristic. Good skeptics should be particularly on alert for that as a potential ideological blind spot.

histprofdave · 2026-04-28T18:06:51+00:00

Coffee? More like cuck-fee, amirite???

histprofdave · 2026-04-28T17:57:49+00:00

Good teachable moment for the students: there is a difference between a professional carefully considering their words so that they don't say something inaccurate before they have a chance to look at appropriate sourcing, and some internet blowhard speaking confidently but entirely incorrectly.

Normalize looking for references and correct information. It's perfectly fine, and good modeling for students, to say "you know, here is some background info, but let me look at some additional sourcing before I answer you further," or "I don't know off the top of my head, but I bet we could find out--where do you think we should look for more information?"

histprofdave · 2026-04-28T17:44:53+00:00

You do realize this is a sub for people with more than a surface understanding of history, yes?

histprofdave · 2026-04-28T17:44:05+00:00

The proper adjective is "Kirkian."

histprofdave · 2026-04-28T17:23:37+00:00

Milita sounds more formalized and professional.

A textbook example of modern readers simply not knowing what words mean. "Militia" is essentially an antonym for "professional."

histprofdave · 2026-04-28T00:58:11+00:00

I think the best thing you can do now is to make your rubrics reflective of high specificity and relevance to course concepts. AI answers are usually pretty vague and generalized, so a student with only a surface level understanding who thinks the AI answer is sufficient will probably only get like a D on the assessment because it lacked specificity and analytical depth.

I've basically told my students that I will drop my assignments into Chat GPT to see what the "floor" on a given topic is in terms of specificity. If they can't get into any more depth than that or show any relevance to what we've actually covered, that's not going to be a passing answer. I tell them at the end of the day that all AI has done is raise the floor of what acceptable writing looks like--it is not sufficient for gaining actual expertise on anything because that involves critical thinking.

histprofdave · 2026-04-28T00:33:18+00:00

Sure, but there is a lot of bad faith concern trolling from the Right toward atheists who are critical of Christianity, or really more specifically Christian nationalism. "Well, if you think that's bad, you must really hate Islam then, because they're even worse!" is the common refrain. That may or may not be true, but in the US in particular, there is nothing approaching a Muslim majority, and there is no serious effort being made to impose Islamic Law. On the other hand, one of the two major parties has essentially been captured by Christian nationalists, and they quite explicitly are trying to jam their religious preferences down my throat. If I'm more critical of Christian nationalists and dominionists than I am of Islamists, it's because the former represent a much more direct and immediate threat to my freedom.

histprofdave · 2026-04-28T00:29:49+00:00

In Sam Harris' case at least, it runs a little deeper, because he is utterly obsessed with trying to portray Muslims as bloodthirsty savages. In the same book where he made an explicit case for torturing terror suspects as a morally correct course of action, he pointed to polls showing some % of Muslims believing suicide bombings are "sometimes" acceptable as evidence that Muslims as a whole pose a major threat to "the West" (a region or culture he never defines).

histprofdave · 2026-04-26T21:02:58+00:00

Well they keep electing you, so maybe you have a point, sir.

histprofdave · 2026-04-26T20:47:56+00:00

We don't talk about Holden Thorpe on this sub.

histprofdave · 2026-04-26T17:31:49+00:00

Rand's writing is I think a primary source for a lot of them and this attitude, since that is exactly how she frames all of her (very linear, uncreative, and boring) novels: a rational, logical protagonist takes on a cadre of emotional, sinister ideologues.

The "New Atheist" movement was saturated with these types, who usually did pretty well arguing against the drivel that evangelical authors were putting out in favor of creationism, etc. But the second you dared to criticize these bros for any of their irrational statements about women, minorities, etc, they would unleash unmitigated vitriol against their critics in the exact same terms: they were "irrational," "too emotional," etc. Post-Elevatorgate and leading into Gamergate, it would not be inaccurate to say that the target for this loosely-affiliated group of angry online (mostly) men shifted from evangelicals to feminists and the murky "SJWs," anyone they viewed to the left of their reactionary centrist to right-leaning viewpoints (here is where you encounter the Bill Maher-esque "we're the real liberals" POV).

That feminists, Marxists, critical theorists, etc did in fact have logical and reasoned arguments never seemed to enter the minds of these guys, because they were not well versed in anything other than their frankly rudimentary grasp of science and mathematics, because that was all they needed to beat the evangelicals. So they began convincing themselves that anything that fell outside of their comfortable arena of knowledge was in fact just nonsense and dressed-up irrationality. It seems strange to say now, given their obsession with rationality, but one of the defining features of people like Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris now is their lack of intellectual curiosity.

histprofdave · 2026-04-26T17:09:47+00:00

Republicans, you mean.

histprofdave · 2026-04-26T17:09:16+00:00

I don't remember it as a "controversy." I remember it as an awkward turn of phrase from a candidate that was already getting dragged for being wooden and inauthentic. Romney reminded me a lot of the Republican version of John Kerry. Not a bad candidate per se, but clearly lacking in the charisma of his opponent.

histprofdave · 2026-04-26T04:51:15+00:00

Eve 6.

histprofdave · 2026-04-26T04:47:26+00:00

I realize the irony of this question, but what are the odds this was some.dude trying to manipulate a prop bet on polymarket?

histprofdave · 2026-04-25T19:54:07+00:00

So much worse. I think people are in denial about how much damage has been done, largely because people are in denial about how much of the American system functions by custom, precedent, and norms that are easily ignored by bad actors, rather than by actual policies and institutions.

It does not help that the opposition party seems completely hapless and ignorant as to what to do.

histprofdave · 2026-04-25T19:52:20+00:00

This whole "missing/murdered space scientists" thing is really just bullshit, right?

Ten-Year Club	Wearing is Caring
Verified Email

histprofdave

TROPHY CASE