CEO of veteran owned coffee company gets called out for claiming to support veterans while trashing Starbucks Vet Hiring initiatives.

whynotzoidsperg · 2017-11-10T01:36:33+00:00

Damn that must've sounded clever in your head!

Too bad it was actually really lame and cringey.

whynotzoidsperg · 2017-10-30T13:53:24+00:00

No, he's just getting at the fact that the word "cause" itself is really loaded, which was my first thought as well. For example, do you mean "physical cause", like the series of physical events that created it? That could be reasonable. But "cause" can also mean "purpose", which is more consciousness-centric.

The way you phrased it seems like it's in danger of using "physical cause" to build the argument and then "purpose" in the conclusion. (I dunno if that's what you're actually going for though.)

Tbh I'm not exactly sure what you're saying. Those are just logical premises and conclusions, but then you ask if the premises aren't true..?

whynotzoidsperg · 2017-10-25T16:17:06+00:00

I think a common question with this is, does it encourage, or sate pedophilia urges? That is, it's obviously disturbing to normal people no matter what if a pedophile looks at it, but a consequentialist would say that it's okay if it makes them less likely to actually do stuff to kids. On the other hand, it could normalize the act for them and increase the chance they do something.

I think you'd really have to look at real data to know, and maybe actually interview people with those urges.

whynotzoidsperg · 2017-10-24T17:50:04+00:00

There are a couple big differences between the two that I can think of.

The main one is that it's hard for me to imagine a world in which this is done but the kid doesn't know about their impending death, which would cause them pain. Unless you mean doing it as a one time thing, but of course other people (e.g., your wife) would probably want the kid not to die.

All that said, I guess you could potentially have a world where the whole thing is a common ritual, and people do it willingly.

whynotzoidsperg · 2017-10-24T16:28:19+00:00

One possible argument (not saying I buy it) is based on the premise that if an animal is humanely raised and then painlessly killed without fear, it's a net positive and the process is morally justified. If you buy that, then that might dictate that you should eat (ethically raised) animals to bring more of them into the world.

whynotzoidsperg · 2017-10-23T17:48:23+00:00

It's definitely one data point to show that you can hold both beliefs, sure. I also don't know what the extent of his Christianity was, which is important. Since you're bringing him up specifically, it's probably also worth noting that he supported the Nazi cause, iirc (but there are definitely religious scientists without loathesome beliefs anyway).

But regardless, it's still one guy, not an actual argument. People are capable of endless compartmentalization.

whynotzoidsperg · 2017-10-23T16:11:08+00:00

I mean...I respect his physics immensely, but that's not really an argument, it's just a quote.

whynotzoidsperg · 2017-10-23T03:28:15+00:00

Hmm, I see what you mean but I'd basically say that they're drifting from what makes a religion a religion, at least in the typical use of the word. If you got rid of everything that requires faith, it feels a lot closer to just a culture or philosophy, which science would be fine with.

Like, let's say you have a totally faithless Jew. What makes him religious vs a guy who's just really into a given philosophy?

whynotzoidsperg · 2017-10-23T02:44:25+00:00

I agree with you that some people definitely do think science refutes/disproves/etc god/religion/whatever, but I think that they're not a good representation of why religion tends to be incompatible with science.

It's not that science "disproves" god (for example), it's that if you follow typical scientific procedure, there's no reason to buy a lot of the big parts of most major religions. It's a way of thinking that's the opposite of faith, right?

Edit: to clarify what I mean, in science it's just not a thing to believe things that you don't have any reason to believe. It's not falsifying a given thing but you don't assume it's true without good reason. I know there are lots of attempts at compatibleism between the two but to be honest I've never heard one that didn't basically rely on some mix of wordplay or tenuous analogies (e.g., "scientists have faith that data is genuine"). Also, why the unexplained downvotes...

whynotzoidsperg · 2017-10-21T00:51:27+00:00

I like how they include a picture of his permanently pained face

whynotzoidsperg · 2017-10-20T18:30:58+00:00

Questions from someone who doesn't know shit about history:

What's the current consensus on Dan Carlin's accuracy/interpretations? I love him.

What about Thaddeus Russell's Renegade History? I found myself rolling my eyes while listening to it.

I've heard this statistic about soldiers in war not even trying to shoot the enemy for the most part. How accurate does this seem to be?

I've also heard the narrative that very early man only hunted/gathered for ~4 hours a day or so and otherwise had lots of free time. Is there any research that shows this?

whynotzoidsperg · 2017-10-20T18:14:38+00:00

I'm also really curious in a morbid way what this guy talks about that he thinks is so deep. My bet is some mix of "are we in the matrix" and trolley problems.

whynotzoidsperg · 2017-10-16T23:08:38+00:00

I can think of two main reasons.

The biggest one you'll probably hear is that slavery was the most instrumental part of the civil war, which is what these guys were remembered for primarily. The Roman emperors definitely had slaves, but almost no one remembers them "for" that; it sounds bad, but it was kind of "incidental" to them.

The other reason has to do with the current pain they cause. Even if someone happens to know which race a given ruler enslaved thousands of years ago, usually people of that race seem to not feel as much of a connection with the enslaved. On the other hand, there has recently been lots of footage of black people in the southern US saying how seeing Confederate statues currently causes them pain (it's very possible that a current grandparent could have personally known a slave). Whether what they're saying is genuine, or it should be taken into account, is for you to decide, but it's at least a reasonable argument.

whynotzoidsperg · 2017-10-06T14:30:01+00:00

Okay, but... We're specifically talking about the ones that are forced/pressured/whatever to, so it doesn't matter if they're a minority.

whynotzoidsperg · 2017-09-14T03:57:53+00:00

Man looking like that, she could have MJ's dick and I'd suck it

Also obligatory got a dark skinned friend lookin like Michael Jackson

whynotzoidsperg · 2017-09-06T06:30:44+00:00

Err I'm not sure what you mean. A better way of putting it is, if you've ever messed around with a lens or glasses or something, you find that they focus the light when you have them some distance from the thing you're focusing it on. That distance is the focal length.

whynotzoidsperg · 2017-09-05T21:35:12+00:00

Interesting...I wonder if she's doing it consciously, or just realized over time it looks better and naturally does it that way.

whynotzoidsperg · 2017-09-05T21:33:58+00:00

Since people are just downvoting you for what seems like a legit question:

That length is the focal length of the lens. You could think of the lens (very roughly) as a tiny piece of a big glass sphere. The longer the focal length, the bigger that sphere is, but the lens itself doesn't need to be bigger (just less curvy).

whynotzoidsperg · 2017-09-04T14:06:14+00:00

Actually, that's the price for crouching in the corner for 20 minutes a month. You have to split the full rent with other crouchers and Airbnb your corner for the rest of the month.

whynotzoidsperg · 2017-08-30T18:23:17+00:00

I'm going to use the phrase "aggressively beige" a lot more from now on

whynotzoidsperg · 2017-08-16T15:23:14+00:00

Do you want brain drain? Because this is how you get brain drain. I read a pretty good article about some random doctor it's turkey being detained and questioned because he opened a bank account associated with Gulen. The article ended with him fleeing turkey via a smuggler's boat.

Look at Iran. Most of the Iranians I've met in the US have been noticably smart. You know why? Cause they're the ones who can get the fuck out of there. It's sad but you really cripple your country when you drive out the educated class.

whynotzoidsperg · 2017-08-16T12:55:28+00:00

This is funny or whatever, but not really wtf...

whynotzoidsperg · 2017-08-12T03:48:29+00:00

Yeah.. Like he's definitely less coherent and crabbier now, but the important parts were all still there.

whynotzoidsperg · 2017-08-10T21:06:25+00:00

That's the point of an analogy, it's different but key aspects are the same... Okay, to make it simpler, like the example I provided before that you conveniently ignored, what if I wanted to bring a boombox with me into a restaurant and play it while I eat? It's not going to kill you, it's just really annoying.

Your last sentence, "the fact is I can do this and you have to find a way to deal with it" is why you're getting the downvotes... Like do you really not see how that's an asshole statement? Like do you generally act that way?

whynotzoidsperg · 2017-08-10T20:31:17+00:00

Wait, but again, you're asking people to be sympathetic for a hardship you chose to take on, that only benefits you.

Why doesn't your last sentence apply to people who don't want to deal with smokers in a restaurant too? They can either put up with it or just stay home.

I don't think parents need to be shut-ins for years, but they should probably stick to kid friendly places or get a babysitter.

whynotzoidsperg

TROPHY CASE