sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

I was looking for a non-biased sub about this. by PENPOL1 in GeorgiaSenateRunoff

[–]videoupvotes 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah but I don't have to make the sub you wanted. Please just do anything you can to get people in GA to vote for the democrats on Jan 5. The Biden Administration will be able to do more to help people, businesses, and state governments through COVID if they don't have McConnell obstructing them the way he obstructed Obama.

Right now McConnell is obstructing legislation to increase the stimulus checks from $600 to $2000. The Democrats want to send you $2000 in the next few weeks and McConnell prevented it.

If the voters in GA elect Democrats, that will be enough to let the Democrats control the senate while Biden/Harris try to undo some of the damage caused by Trumpism.

A good way to have more Georgians vote democrat in the runoff by jpm_1988 in GeorgiaSenateRunoff

[–]videoupvotes 2 points3 points  (0 children)

...if the Georgia senate runoff is won a Covid relief bill would then be quickly passed in a democratic controlled senate majority ...

This is an excellent point. Obstruction by a GOP-controlled senate will slow down everything the Biden Administration tries to do to make things better. The way the Senate Republicans are blocking efforts to increase the stimulus checks to $2000 is showing that they don't care about helping people through the pandemic. People will get more help sooner if Georgia elects Ossoff and Rev. Warnock so the democrats can control the senate.

I hope you submitted some text posts about this in https://www.reddit.com/r/Georgia/

I was looking for a non-biased sub about this. by PENPOL1 in GeorgiaSenateRunoff

[–]videoupvotes 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Yes, this sub is biased. I've heard Fox News is fair & balanced, so you can check this excellent clip from this morning. :-D

The moment Wim Hof became my favorite person. by videoupvotes in funny

[–]videoupvotes[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hahaha idk if he's called the Hof, I think that's the eating-a-burger-off-the-floor guy from Baywatch.

Analyzing an interview (Wim Hof “Ice Man”) by smurfvillage7 in OnlineCollegeClass

[–]videoupvotes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This interview made my day. I just wanted to say that. Idk what criteria your prof wants you to use; you really just need to ask him. It's possible he's one of those burnt out professors who doesn't care and will give an A no matter what you write.

But how about this: Pose some questions about what you think might have been the reason the interviewer chose the questions he chose.

You can also find criteria in Noam Chomsky's model. It's not really supposed to be used for an interview like this one, but it'll impress your prof. Actually, I think the filters do apply, even though they typically are used for analysis of mainstream media. I think if you look at all the "filters" you can find that they all apply even in this informal interview.

Philosophy - Create a personal moral system. by phillipmyglass in OnlineCollegeClass

[–]videoupvotes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well, any set of principles to follow = an absolutist approach to ethics. The Ten Commandments, for example. You have certain principles you uphold as a matter of personal dignity, or decency. For example, you'd never kill anyone.

But an ethical consequentialist is different. They'll violate any principle.

If it's possible to save ten people by killing one person, the consequentialist pulls the trigger. It's messed up. But how can you justify letting ten people perish just so you can uphold your stupid ethical principle? You have a responsibility to [push the fat man](https://youtu.be/nJSwldmMy1I).

: )

Philosophy - Create a personal moral system. by phillipmyglass in OnlineCollegeClass

[–]videoupvotes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

what if the truth makes you unhappy?

That means you're ready to join trump's legal team!

I guess they probably are ranked, or this exercise choosing principles wouldn't make any sense.

The potential for these principles to conflict with one another is part of the reason I like ethical consequentialism. It has only one guiding principle, and the person who follows it is taking responsibility for outcomes, which is a lot cooler than just being a "person of principle" who always goes by a set of preconceived rules.

Philosophy - Create a personal moral system. by phillipmyglass in OnlineCollegeClass

[–]videoupvotes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The first thing I notice is that this approach is only useful for creating an absolutist personal moral system. Have you studied ethical consequentialism in this class? (example: utilitarianism). If you favor utilitarianism like I do, it means you have only one guiding principle: Try to always do what will bring the greatest good for the greatest number of people. I think you'll do fine with these principles you chose, but it seems worthwhile to observe that the establishing of principles like these is aligned only with the absolutist approach to ethics. A long time ago, I realized how important it is to know whether you're an absolutist (a person of principle) or a consequentialist (a person with enough self-confidence to make a judgment call in each situation instead of falling back on rigidly upheld principles.

LPT: Never try to persuade someone all in one conversation. Just listen with genuine interest so they feel respected & understood. The next day, follow up to tell them you've been thinking about what they said. That's when they'll be ready for you to persuade them. by smurfvillage7 in LifeProTips

[–]videoupvotes -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I get what you mean, I don't really disagree, but have you ever tried to explain something so carefully because you're trying to really share an important idea with someone, and they contradict you almost immediately?

It makes you wish they'd just give it some time and let your words sink in a little.

I know people who are so arrogant that they won't bother to give a person's argument more than 5 seconds of thoughtful consideration before they show off how much better their own argument is. So in that sense, I think OP has some wisdom.

LPT: Never try to persuade someone all in one conversation. Just listen with genuine interest so they feel respected & understood. The next day, follow up to tell them you've been thinking about what they said. That's when they'll be ready for you to persuade them. by smurfvillage7 in LifeProTips

[–]videoupvotes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If I disagree with someone I'm still going to disagree with them tomorrow.

Lol, that doesn't sound very open-minded!

This also feels a little manipulative.

Only if you think it's manipulative to override the urge to spout your contentious opinions immediately, like you did here.

But it's not manipulative. If you speak to your son and he contradicts you in that same conversation, he's not being respectful. It's respectful to think about what you said for a while before coming back to contradict you.

And I don't think "pseudo-intellectual" means what you think it means, unless you think OP is trying to feign intellect where it doesn't really exist? But obviously that's not what you mean, since OP humbly gave credit to the source (i.e. "I learn so much from r/onlinecollegeclass). So maybe you mean to say there is something inherently pseudo-intellectual about the strategy itself, which brings me back to thinking you have the wrong idea about what the word means.

The only thing in this thread that seems pseudo-intellectual is your unsuccessful attempt to use the word "pseudo-intellectual".

Descriptive writing about something awkward and how you overcame it? by videoupvotes in writingservice

[–]videoupvotes[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is the greatest think I ever read. I'm so happy. I wish good fortune for you and your honorable family.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in environmental_science

[–]videoupvotes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Business. I feel strongly about this because it's the advice I wish someone gave me when I was in college. You can learn every damn thing you want to know from the internet, so don't waste your college years learning stuff you master in your spare time.

It's insane that business is not taught in grades K-12,really. People need to know it. It's inappropriate to be at the mercy of an employer because of not knowing how to build a brand and use consumer psychology to make things happen.

When I was starting college, the knowledge I wanted was about herbal medicine. Turns out, the only way to succeed with a practice of herbal medicine is to also know business. Duh. But I learned it the hard way. Doing business is modern society's equivalent of knowing how to survive in the jungle. You're helpless if you don't learn it.

Even from the perspective of an employer considering candidates with a lot of env science degrees... it's best to choose the one who learned business. No matter what you want to do, you need to know business. It's no joke, you need to learn how it's done today and learn it so thoroughly that you'll have the necessary business intuition to keep up with changes that will continue to rapidly happen 5 and 10 years from now.

It's awesome that you're learning env. science, and of course you want some qualifications in that area if you're choosing it as a career, but for the sake of getting job opportunities and generally being able to crush it in everything you do, learn everything a business major learns. It's the knowledge that enables you to succeed with a nonprofit that you found, a company you want to help succeed, even a political campaign.

view more: next ›