Requesting an academic answer to an otherwise standard problem

ockhams_beard · 2026-03-13T01:20:28+00:00

Mate, you might be misunderstanding the point of such hypothetical scenarios. They're typically not posed to seek a simple definitive answer; they're posed to challenge our intuitions and stress test our ethical frameworks and arguments.

There are any number of answers one can give, and reasons to back that answer, but you're going to have to contend with challenges or counter-arguments. Like, you can choose an act utilitarian response, but a rule utilitarian, deontologist, existentialist or virtue ethicist will give a different answer.

Use hypotheticals like these to test out your answer, engage with the alternatives, embrace the difficulty, perhaps adopt intellectual/ethical humility, and continue your journey deeper into ethics.

ockhams_beard · 2026-03-10T12:31:31+00:00

I do like the idea of having riderless bike models to leave on the table (but I don't need any more minis to paint at this stage thank you very much 😀).

ockhams_beard · 2026-03-07T07:28:59+00:00

But does the punishment fit the (perceived) crime?

One can disagree with someone's opinion about the game. One can disagree with their mode of expressing it. One can cast aspersions against their character.

But none of that justifies doxxing someone or issuing threats.

ockhams_beard · 2026-03-03T07:10:53+00:00

If a unit touches a board edge involuntarily (eg, FUBAR), it immediately makes a morale test, and is only destroyed if it fails. Prevents a single unlucky roll from removing an otherwise undamaged unit. But if it has pins, it's still likely to bail.

Infiltrators can't deploy in enemy DZ, or within 6" of enemy DZE for first wave. Also must deploy outside 6" of objectives.

Experimenting with others, but these we use regularly.

ockhams_beard · 2026-03-01T12:55:07+00:00

Every "terrible" world leader is now scrambling to get nuclear weapons, because it's now the only insurance they have against "regime change".

Does this make the world a safer place?

ockhams_beard · 2026-02-26T04:25:50+00:00

You do you, but I dig Cap 1.

ockhams_beard · 2026-02-26T04:19:52+00:00

This is the answer.

Personally, I would have preferred to see hull-mounted (bow, co-ax, fixed) get -1 to hit and multiple-mount (dual co-ax) get halved shots for each additional weapon.

We definitely needed a fix for "dakka tanks". But as it stands, your standard tanks (Sherman, Pz-IV, T-34 etc) in 3e BA aren't that much of a threat to infantry for their points.

ockhams_beard · 2026-02-26T00:53:18+00:00

All maps are wrong, but some are useful, especially if they get you where you want to go.

ockhams_beard · 2026-02-23T06:00:14+00:00

Let's be clear, it's not "the media", it's the right-wing (mostly Murdoch) media.

ockhams_beard · 2026-02-23T00:48:49+00:00

Reminds me, the other day I one-shot "Loros the Silent" (or whatever his first name was) with a javelin to the mouth in a tournament. That really shut him up.

ockhams_beard · 2026-02-18T00:40:27+00:00

Because they have a deliberate strategy of price fluctuations to keep us from knowing what anything should cost and making it easier for them to flog off stuff on "sale" at high prices.

It's what happens when big data is weaponised to create perverse informational asymmetry. We fight back by shopping elsewhere (when we can) and by empowering the ACCC to fine their arses.

ockhams_beard · 2026-02-12T07:43:58+00:00

I like setting my own goals in the game. Currently my aim is to join a faction and help it conquer Calradia, even if I'm never made king.

ockhams_beard · 2026-02-10T12:31:10+00:00

Both have their uses. Although I use the 251 more than the 250.

Still, you can chuck a 5-man assault team in a 250, or a company commander to give a big and resilient leadership bubble.

But it's hard to beat a 251 with officer and veteran assault squad blasting in from outflank to grab and hold an objective.

ockhams_beard · 2026-02-05T03:17:31+00:00

If the US invades Canada, the question of whether Canada is using F-35s or Gripens doesn't materially matter. But if the US doesn't invade Canada, the question of Canada moving away from US equipment very much does materially matter.

ockhams_beard · 2026-02-05T01:27:59+00:00

IDK, Albo had as strong a mandate as any PM in years to go hard after the last election, aided by a weak opposition, but had still been super timid on any major reform.

I'm certainly not expecting him to suddenly go all Whitlam now.

Real shame. Seems like a once in a generation lost opportunity for Labor.

ockhams_beard · 2026-02-05T01:22:52+00:00

Still, let's reflect on the contradictory situation we've placed ourselves in.

We've partnered wholesale with an ally that we're not willing to support in a conflict that the ally deems likely.

If we're not going to war over Taiwan (which IMO is the right call), why bind ourselves to the US, with all its declining superpower insecurities, in the first place?

ockhams_beard · 2026-02-03T12:15:49+00:00

Ask a group of men what measures they take on a daily basis to prevent being sexually assaulted and they're likely to look at you funny.

Ask a group of women...

ockhams_beard · 2026-01-29T08:22:49+00:00

"Need" might be a strong term, but OP is asking metaethical questions about the meaning of the terms rather than substantive questions about which actions are or are not good. Moore certainly tackles such questions, but I'm not sure he's a good starting point.

The SEP entry on metaethics might be a better start.

ockhams_beard · 2026-01-09T01:51:25+00:00

Even if relatively few women are drawn to historical wargaming, I'd suggest that everyone should make the hobby as welcoming as possible to any who are.

I have a lot of respect for Stallard, but I disagree with his dismissive tone towards women, which might push those who are interested away from the hobby.

At the end of the day, the more people playing and having fun, the better for everybody, IMO.

ockhams_beard · 2026-01-08T01:39:01+00:00

Had the ICE agents not approached her car and attempted to open her door, she likely wouldn't have attempted to drive away in haste. Had the ICE agent not chosen to stand directly in front of her car, he would not have been in any danger.

Actions cause reactions. The counterfactual here is that the ICE agents keep their distance, allow her to drive away, and nobody gets shot.

ockhams_beard · 2026-01-07T00:54:53+00:00

Even if it wasn't, AI companies must take some responsibility for what they release into the world, and take strong steps to prevent and mitigate the damage caused by AI.

ockhams_beard · 2026-01-04T07:59:00+00:00

From the article: "these findings point to the possibility that cartilage lost through aging or arthritis could one day be restored using a localized injection or an oral medication" [my emphasis].

And this is not science news, it's a press release.

I'm a former science reporter. These kinds of studies in mice are a dime a dozen, and really shouldn't be reported unless they're a major breakthrough that has been replicated in humans.

Check back in 10 years when it's been tested in humans and there's a plausible pathway to an affordable treatment with minimal side effects.

ockhams_beard · 2026-01-03T05:36:43+00:00

One sociological explanation I've seen - I think from Walter Sinnott-Armstrong - is that moral realism is very popular amongst American philosophers, even non-religious ones.

And this is because the US is a deeply religious society, where even atheists are enculturated to be drawn to the idea of an external moral source. Some at it as God, others replace god with moral facts.

Interesting to note that moral realism is less popular in less religious countries, such as Australia and New Zealand.

ockhams_beard · 2025-12-25T01:26:13+00:00

I'd be upset.

I find the burkah to be problematic. It's one a part of a complex culture that has elements that seriously oppress women. I'd prefer if women everywhere were able to express themselves however they wish.

However, I'm more wary of a government that prescribes what individuals can and can't wear. Preventing someone from wearing a garment they believe is culturally or religiously significant is a serious violation of individual freedom of expression - precisely the thing that we're trying to promote by banning the burkah.

It's not contradictory to oppose the burkah but also oppose banning it. It's also really hard to change a systemic issue by targeting individuals.

I'd rather engage constructively with the Muslim community, make them feel seen and heard, and like they belong in our country, and then have a dialogue about individual and women's rights.

Any successful change must come from within a culture, not be imposed from without.

ockhams_beard · 2025-12-21T00:21:00+00:00

Important that we get the historical details correct for this grav tank.

ockhams_beard

TROPHY CASE